yep.  sounds fair

On Jan 23, 2018 9:52 AM, "Chris Mattmann" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Joe,
>
> Great analysis.
>
> Can you do me a favor:
>
> 1. Raise a LEGAL JIRA with the below insight.
> 2. Contact the Apache SIS PMC and ask them how they
> dealt with it? SIS is an ASF project and is expected to be following ASF
> release guidelines which gives me confidence in the product (and its
> dependencies that
> they ship). Martin Desruisseaux is an ASF member and their Chair and is
> very thorough
> I'm sure they ran into this and have some idea.
>
> Tika should action (or not) based on #1 and 2 above. Sound good?
>
> Cheers,
> Chris Mattmann
> (wearing his VP, Legal hat).
>
>
> On 1/23/18, 5:53 AM, "Joe Witt" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>     Chris
>
>     Bottom line up front: Is
>     https://github.com/unitsofmeasurement/jsr-275/blob/0.9.3/LICENSE.txt
>     Category A or Category B?
>
>
>     ****** a bunch of words to explain why I'm asking ****
>
>     I truly do not wish to create a problem where there is none.  L&N is
>     truly a painful thing.  That said, based on my experience and current
>     understanding of ASF policies and guidance I do believe there is a
>     problem.
>
>     If you think this thread is better on legal-discuss please let me
>     know.  My hope in starting the thread here was to get a 'yep this is a
>     known thing - we cleared it with legal - here is a mailing list thread
>     or JIRA or something'.
>
>     What I believe to be true is that there are binary artifacts which are
>     under licenses.  Those licenses are either compatible with the ASF
>     legal policy or they are not and specifically they're either listed as
>     Category-A or Category-B from
>     https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html.  If they're not you cannot
>     use them as binary dependencies until they are on that list.
>
>     What is also true is that apache-tika-parsers version 1.16 (at least)
>     depends on org/opengis/geoapi 3.0.0 which depends on
>     javax.measure.jsr-275:0.9.3.  That artifact appears to be under this
>     license: https://github.com/unitsofmeasurement/jsr-275/
> blob/0.9.3/LICENSE.txt.
>
>     Plainly, from my quick read and review that binary artifact
>     (jsr-275:0.9.3) does not appear to be a Category A or Category B
>     license.  Do you believe it is?  If yes which Cat-A/Cat-B is it
>     considered to be?  Is there a mailing list thread, Legal-Discuss, or
>     L&N entry in Tika that calls this out so I can reference that?
>
>     Now for more general background:
>     There are all kinds of threads on the Internet about the problems with
>     JSR-275 and that JSR-363 is the way to go to move on with regard to
>     the unit of measure work, etc..
>
>     If you look at the source for opengis/geoapi which I believe is here
>     https://github.com/opengeospatial/geoapi/tree/3.0.0 which is what
>     tika-parsers uses then it will pull in the jsr-275:jar:0.9.3.
>
>     If you look at the source for opengis/geoapi for latest milestone
>     release https://github.com/opengeospatial/geoapi/tree/4.0-M06 you can
>     see they've moved on from JSR-275 and now use JSR-363.
>
>     Further, the Apache SIS project in their Nov 2017 release 0.8
>     (Tika-parsers 1.16 uses apache sis 0.6) clearly stated in their NOTICE
>     they depend on JSR-363.  Not sure if they were specifically relying on
>     JSR-275 before that or not as it isn't called out.
>
>     Thanks
>     Joe
>
>     On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 11:43 AM, Chris Mattmann <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>     > Hi Joe,
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > My quick read on the license is that it’s a spec jar in a transitive
>     > dependency. SIS has made
>     > many releases and is an ASF project (of which this JSR 275 is one
> dependency
>     > that I believe is
>     > just the JSR spec API). I think you’re fine to use Tika and to use
> SIS in
>     > NiFi.
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > Cheers,
>     >
>     > Chris
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > From: Joe Witt <[email protected]>
>     > Reply-To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
>     > Date: Monday, January 22, 2018 at 8:06 AM
>     > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
>     > Subject: Re: Tika-parsers using cat-x json.org dep and is geoapis
> ok?
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > tika team
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > bumping this thread as i beleive tika is using a non asl/asf
> compatible
>     > library.
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > thanks
>     >
>     > joe
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > On Dec 6, 2017 12:27 AM, "Joe Witt" <[email protected]> wrote:
>     >
>     > Tika Team,
>     >
>     > I'm finally coming back to this thread and getting Apache NiFi all
>     > caught up with the latest Tika-Core and Tika-Parsers version.
>     >
>     > I am back to looking at the GeoAPIs 3.0.0 stuff which as you
> mentioned
>     > the license is ok.  It does, however, have a transitive dependency on
>     > 'JSR 275 0.9.3' library.  The license for this was much harder to
> find
>     > but this appears to be it [1] and it appears decided un-ASF friendly
>     > to me. Can you please clarify why this library is ok to use?  I'm
> just
>     > trying to get our L&N done for NiFi so want to understand how this is
>     > ok.  I was not able to find anything in the Legal discuss/JIRA for
>     > this.
>     >
>     > Here is the GeoAPIs team talking about this dependency and what they
>     > will do with it [2, 3].
>     >
>     > [1] https://github.com/unitsofmeasurement/jsr-275/
> blob/0.9.3/LICENSE.txt
>     > [2] https://osgeo-org.atlassian.net/browse/GEO-190
>     > [3] https://github.com/opengeospatial/geoapi/issues/8
>     >
>     > Thanks
>     > Joe
>     >
>     > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 11:50 AM, Chris Mattmann <
> [email protected]>
>     > wrote:
>     >> Thanks Joe. The legal-discuss/committee for the ASF is discussing
> getting
>     >> a 6
>     >> month time period on this b/c there are transitive dependencies all
> over
>     >> for
>     >> this. We will be appreciative of a time frame since I think
> replacing it
>     >> with
>     >> another JSON library will likely be non trivial and involve some
> PRs.
>     >>
>     >> RE: [2] and [3] it’s the same dependencies that Apache SIS uses and
> I
>     >> think
>     >> we are good there – in fact they are pulled in by SIS.
>     >>
>     >> Thanks,
>     >> Chris
>     >>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> On 11/15/16, 8:06 PM, "Joe Witt" <[email protected]> wrote:
>     >>
>     >>     Tika Team,
>     >>
>     >>     The ASF has recently changed their mind regarding the json.org
> [0]
>     >> dependency this individual is referring to [1].  I believe that
> JIRA needs
>     >> to be reopened.  It has blocked Apache NiFi from being able to
> update to
>     >> using the newest tika-parsers.
>     >>
>     >>     In reviewing the list of other new dependencies I also ran
> across
>     >> geoapis which was pulled in during [2].  It's license looks
> questionable to
>     >> me given the claim of need to give notice to any changed OGC
> files.  It
>     >> looks BSD-ish but not quite sure [3].  I don't see this called out
> in your
>     >> LICENSE or NOTICE and I could not find a legal thread.  Are you
> sure this is
>     >> ok to use?
>     >>
>     >>     [0] https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved#category-x
>     >>     [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TIKA-1804
>     >>     [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TIKA-443
>     >>     [3] https://github.com/opengeospatial/geoapi/blob/3.
> 0.0/LICENSE.txt
>     >>
>     >>     Thanks
>     >>     Joe
>     >>
>     >>
>     >>
>
>
>
>

Reply via email to