On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 at 13:17, Gian Merlino <[email protected]> wrote: > For Q1 the legal guidance as I understand it is that we can provide users > with instructions for how to get optional (L)GPL dependencies, but we can't > distribute them ourselves. Putting the mysql-connector in an Docker image > does feel like distribution… > > Q2 is an interesting question. I wonder if Apache has a policy on official > or semiofficial Docker containers that touches on the possibly thorny > licensing questions. It seems that they do exist for other projects, > though: https://hub.docker.com/u/apache. The Zeppelin one, for example, is > based on ubuntu so it must have plenty of GPL stuff in it: > https://hub.docker.com/r/apache/zeppelin/dockerfile. And it is presented > on > the Zeppelin page as an official thing: > https://zeppelin.apache.org/docs/0.7.0/install/docker.html. > > I dunno, it feels weird to me, and I am searching for evidence of these > issues having been explicitly discussed by other projects but have not > found it yet. > > > GPL does not attach by mere aggregation. [see GPL FAQ <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#MereAggregation>] All linux is gpl, and all the containers are linux for all the other apache foundation things (maven, httpd, ...). even debian has bash in it, which is gpl.
so I can either: a) continue as is. I want to get this on dockerhub auto-built, that's what he script does now. BTW, it downloads the gpl code from maven repository, which is also run by apache. b) remove it, support postgres only. both are ok w/ me I suppose.
