+1 > On Mar 6, 2016, at 6:58 PM, Gino Bustelo <lbust...@gmail.com> wrote: > > @john The 0mq ecosystem is made up of many projects of different sizes and > maturity. In the case of JeroMQ, the committers are showing an overwhelming > momentum to transition to MPL. I don't see any reason for us to consider any > other alternative at this juncture. > > Gino B. > >> On Mar 5, 2016, at 11:42 PM, Henri Yandell <bay...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> Having chatted around the 0mq community in the past; I've confidence in >> their desire to move to MPL; and 26/32 committers is a great step forward. >> You raise a good reservation though John - if you remove the blocker on the >> usage side, it's easy for the licensing to remain as is. >> >> >> I'm +1 for releasing, with a prominent note of the LGPL dependency (along >> with a note of the resolution plan). It might be that the Toree committers >> may be motivated to rewrite code over at 0mq if there ends up being any >> committers who are unavailable or unwilling to relicense. >> >> Hen >> >>> On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 3:45 PM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> Sorry, misread the revision I was looking at. The intent to move to MPL >>> was done on March 22 2014, 2 years ago this month, not December 2013. >>> >>> John >>> >>> On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 6:41 PM John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I have some reservations with what you're proposing, and would like you >>> to >>>> consult w/ legal-discuss on this first. >>>> >>>> There's a difference between what Mynewt did and what you're proposing. >>>> Specifically, this was a transitive dependency that they relied upon >>>> indirectly, so its more of a call out for the library that was leveraging >>>> it. They also intended to replace the library. >>>> >>>> In your case, you're directly tied to a presently LGPL'd library. You >>>> have no intentions (from what I can see) of moving off of the library. >>>> >>>> I'm also doubting their long term goals of moving to MPL. If you look at >>>> [1], you'll see that the page hasn't been updated since October 2014. In >>>> addition, looking at the pages revision history (the beauty of wikis), >>> the >>>> intent to move to MPL was published in December 2013, making the >>> statement >>>> over 2 years old. >>>> >>>> I think while this might be OK for an initial incubator release, the >>>> project needs to weigh very heavily if it wants to continue to leverage >>>> ZeroMQ or not going forward. >>>> >>>> [1]: http://zeromq.org/area:licensing >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 5:06 PM Gino Bustelo <g...@bustelos.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Wanted to give folks an update on our progress with dealing with JeroMQ, >>>>> an >>>>> LGPL package that enables us to communicate via 0MQ. The 0MQ community >>> is >>>>> very aware of the issues with LGPL (LGPLv3 + static link exception) and >>> it >>>>> is their intention to try to move projects to MPL v2. This is not an >>> easy >>>>> task depending on the age and size of the projects. >>>>> >>>>> Apache Toree's API access point is through the 0MQ transport layer >>> (using >>>>> JeroMQ) and that is how Apache Toree connects out-of-the-box with >>> Jupyter, >>>>> a very common way of consuming Apache Toree that is already in >>> production. >>>>> >>>>> At this point, the JeroMQ project is still released under LGPL, but our >>>>> team initiated communications in mid-February with members of the JeroMQ >>>>> community to begin their transition to MPL v2 ( >>>>> https://github.com/zeromq/jeromq/issues/326). The JeroMQ community >>>>> reacted >>>>> very positively and quickly began the process of collecting votes from >>>>> their committers (https://github.com/zeromq/jeromq/issues/327). After >>> 15 >>>>> days, the current tally stands at 26 out of 32 committers have agreed to >>>>> switch license. >>>>> >>>>> Apache Toree has a JIRA ( >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOREE-262) >>>>> where we keep all the relevant links and update with the latest >>>>> information. As that process is underway, we will move forward with >>> plans >>>>> to release a 0.1.0 version of Apache Toree based on the precedence set >>> by >>>>> Apache Mynewt ( >>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201602.mbox/%3C5F118AA0-4ADA-403B-A6EB-4A85F0B30651%40me.com%3E >>>>> ). >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Gino >>> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
