Andy,
I was hasty I have now checked. Both Zukka's issue and mine are
VSDUMP. They aren't a secret. It is in the NOTICE.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/apache-poi/trunk/src/scratchpad/src/org/apache/
poi/hdgf> find . -exec grep -li vsdump {} \; -exec grep -ni vsdump
{} \;./.svn/text-base/HDGFLZW.java.svn-base
27: * According to VSDump, "it's a slightly perverted version of LZW
30: * (http://www.gnome.ru/projects/vsdump_en.html)
./chunks/.svn/text-base/ChunkFactory.java.svn-base
34: * Makes use of chunks_parse_cmds.tbl from vsdump to be able
./chunks/ChunkFactory.java
34: * Makes use of chunks_parse_cmds.tbl from vsdump to be able
./HDGFLZW.java
27: * According to VSDump, "it's a slightly perverted version of LZW
30: * (http://www.gnome.ru/projects/vsdump_en.html)
The page referenced in the source is now 404. Not good.
In other words "no, no one has taken a serious look to make sure there
are no more such issues"
Please, don't put words in my mouth. I said I was questioning it too.
I wasn't saying that no one has looked into it.
Let's see what Nick has to say. Then we can decide if it must be
removed. If we must really be LGPL free.
Or we need to change the NOTICE to mention both uses in the single
scratchpad component.
If you feel that you need to do your own due diligence please feel
free. More eyes are always better,
Regards,
Dave
On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 11:59 PM, David Fisher
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There is this one from the NOTICE that I wanted to bring up before
FINAL.
A single resource file of the POI scratchpad component HDGF is
taken from
VSDump, and is under the GNU General Public Licence version 3 (GPL
v3):
http://gplv3.fsf.org/
Since this is a data file, and has no compiled version (the original
file is distributed in both source and binary versions of POI),
there
should
be little difference in licencing requirements compared to the ASL.
For those wishing to avoid this component, the HDGF part of the POI
scratchpad should be omitted.
See http://www.gnome.ru/projects/vsdump_en.html
This is used by the class. o.a.p.hdgf.HDGFLZW. Are we good with
this one?
An LZW implementation, do we need to worry about Unisys?
Regards,
Dave
On Dec 7, 2008, at 10:27 PM, Andrew Oliver wrote:
This is a pretty biggy. I used to do periodic license audits.
Are we
sure this is the only problem?
On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 12:12 PM, Jukka Zitting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 3:43 PM, Jukka Zitting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
The GPLv3 does seem to allow (GPLv3 section 4) verbatim copies
of such
source files without the the viral effects, but any modifications
(GPLv3 section 5) to the chunkds_parse_cmds.tbl file would require
licensing entire POI under that license.
Thinking about this a bit more I figured that this reasoning just
doesn't work. HDGF is a "work based on" chunks_parse_cmds.tbl, and
thus falls under section 5 of GPLv3.
Unless we can get the original author to grant as an alternative
license to the file, it should be removed or replaced in one way or
another. I filed bug #46361 [1] for this.
[1] https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46361
BR,
Jukka Zitting
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
