On 4/21/2021 1:04 PM, Matthias Bläsing wrote:
Hi,
Am Mittwoch, den 21.04.2021, 11:01 -0700 schrieb Ernie Rael:
If I take random files, all of which are GPL-CPE, and bundle those into
a jar and put it in maven central then can I call it GPL-CPE?
everytime a license question comes up, the only right answer is: Ask
_your_ lawyer (and be prepared to sue him if he is wrong).
Jokes aside, yes, that is what I would assume.
So in your humble (ie non-lawyer) opinion, you might change your vote if
someone (not necessarily from Oracle) made an unambiguous statement in
the artifact that all the files are CPE. (vote reference independent of
any technical issues)
And the question I was referring too (and too bad about the double negative)
Roman Shaposhnik and Roy T. Fielding, does it help that all the
files making up nb-javac, when scanned for CPE, only the files that
will not end up in the JAR are not covered by CPE:
from
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-563?focusedCommentId=17314085&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-17314085
(and thanks for that joke, I'll remember it)
-ernie
The crux is this
sentence:
Certain source files distributed by Oracle America and/or its
affiliates are subject to the following clarification and special
exception to the GPL, but only where Oracle has expressly included
in the particular source file's header the words "Oracle designates
this particular file as subject to the "Classpath" exception as
provided by Oracle in the LICENSE file that accompanied this code."
[...] Certain source files [...] - all would be so much easier, if this
would have been make unconditional.
So whoever releases nb-javac, at this point Anton Epple made the binary
released on maven central available, could remove that disclaimer and
we would be done:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-563?focusedCommentId=17311712&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-17311712
The interesting question: Are either Anton Epple or Oracle willing to
remove the uncertainty?
I followed Jaroslavs Analysis of the source and did an independed scan
of the codebase and came up with the same conclusion as Jaroslav.
In the end there needs to be a license file, that clarifies, that the
whole binary is subject to the classpath exception.
It's too bad the question asked at the end of
https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/LEGAL/issues/LEGAL-563 was not
answered.
Which question?
Greetings
Matthias
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
