Ciao Adrian, -- About Sun's code --
Going from memory, we have borrowed some code in order to improve it since sending patches to the imageio project was taking too much time (no releases in the last 2 years). The imageio source code is licensed as BSD (at least the java code), hence it should be perfectly legal to reuse/modify/distribute it. Of course I might be wrong, but when I asked the Imageio crew about reusing their code, after you raised some concerns, I got no negative answer either. Of course, if you have more info or you can point to links with more info, that would be great, since, generally speaking, information is scarce and fragmented. Aside from this, I just had this thought, imageio and jai, which are shipped with geotools, are in a similar situation, they have limitations on where the code can be used, as of their licenses, could this itself represent a problem which we should address as well? -- About having coverage depending on imageio-ext -- That is indeed an error and daniele is fixing it. Coverage should not depend for the moment on imageio-ext. However this was done since there are substantial bugs in the tiff imagereader/imagewriter which I fixed in imageio-ext by including and improving Sun's code. We are preparing patches for the imageio project for inclusion, but given the timings of that project it is unlikely that we will see a new release soon. -- About code you don't like in imageio-ext -- Assuming that no core module will depend on imageio-ext for the time being, which I agree would need more consensus, you have various options: 1> do not use plugins that depends on imageio-ext 2> submit a short enhancement report to the imageio-ext project, which we will surely take into account. Aside, usually language can be a barrier and I am sure that that's been the cause of much misunderstandings inside this community. We are open to suggestions/criticisms as, believe it or not, we have always been. Of course there are various ways to express opinion and criticize someone/something, as long as respect is in place no offense will be taken. Ciao, Simone. ------------------------------------------------------- Ing. Simone Giannecchini GeoSolutions S.A.S. Owner - Software Engineer Via Carignoni 51 55041 Camaiore (LU) Italy phone: +39 0584983027 fax: +39 0584983027 mob: +39 333 8128928 http://www.geo-solutions.it http://simboss.blogspot.com/ http://www.linkedin.com/in/simonegiannecchini ------------------------------------------------------- On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:26 AM, Adrian Custer <acus...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, 2009-01-19 at 16:37 +0100, Daniele Romagnoli wrote: >> Hi list, >> I would like to move the gt-imageio-ext-gdal module from unsupported >> to plugin module. > > > > Daniele, > > > That I even write this mail, you will take the wrong way. You will > assume, no doubt, that I am attacking you, that I want GeoSolutions to > fail, that I am simply taking pleasure in criticizing you, that ... Well > so be it, perceive my intentions as you will. That is actually, > profoundly, not my intent but everyone is so paranoid in this community > that I have given up caring how I am read. > > So why do I bother writing this? In a broad sense, my motivation appears > to be my desire to build a world class geospatial library of free > software that I can depend on for ecological research and distribute to > my colleagues and students. In the narrow sense, I suppose I am > composing this to help myself understand better the bitter taste in my > mouth tonight so that I may learn from it. It will take me a good few > hours to write this mail, then I will dwell on it all evening, and > eventually I may even decide not to send this. Still, I presume I will > learn about myself in the process. > > I also write you to address directly the issues that your recent call > for a vote and lightning commit of the imageio-ext dependency bring to > the forefront. > > > > Since you said your imageio-ext project had hit 1.0.0 yesterday and > today you called for its inclusion into GeoTools, I took some time out > from my work this evening to check it out. I wanted to see what a 1.0.0 > number brought to the code, and see if I would recommend having GeoTools > depend on it. Not knowing the code, I opened files perfectly randomly. > The first was a utility class (seems like a good place to start, no?) > which contained only static methods but had a chaotic view of > inheritance: it's not final but not instantiable and then has some > public, some private and some package-protected methods. Okay, that's > not a blocker problem but suggests a lack of care or understanding. The > second class I opened, lists only Martin as the author but is taken into > your namespace and has two separate headers for the same license. Seems > weird, again not a blocker but suggesting a lack of care and confusion > about licensing. The third class I opened has a Sun header which imposes > additional restrictions beyond the LGPL on all subsequent distributors > and has an (L)GPL incompatible field-of-use restriction. My review had > only hit three classes and I had struck out. I conclude that GeoTools > and its derivatives legally cannot depend on your imageio-ext library > until the license issues have been resolved and that, at that point, we > would be well advised to look more deeply at the code to assess its > quality. > > You will remember that I raised the issue of the Sun license > incompatibility several months ago. At that time, I took a similar brief > look at the project's code and discovered a similar (the same?) header. > (Maybe it's just this class, have you taken lots of code from Sun?) At > that point you suggested that I should (1) list the problematic classes > and (2) propose fixes to the code. That is not my job, not my project, > and clearly not a task that falls on my shoulders. I have done enough > work in the licensing area to last me for quite a while. > > > > Aside from that, to my chagrin, you have bulldozed your proposal into > reality. After a long phone call helping another member of our > community, I turn around to find you have, a mere two hours after > calling for a vote, committed our project to your new dependency, to > this new course, and to all the issues that will entail. I am surprised. > I find it surprisingly disrespectful to not even wait for one spin of > the globe to see if anyone in Australia, anyone busy this afternoon, or > anyone away lying sick in bed would have anything to add. But perhaps > you did not really want any opinion, but rather seeking an excuse to > commit. If so, it seems silly to make a show of asking the community for > their opinion but then committing before any productive opinion could > possibly have offered. If you don't actually want any opinion, then save > yourself the trouble of asking for it. Now, I don't actually assume that > you did any of this to be disrespectful intentionally; I merely think > that you want to integrate your code as a direct dependency of Geotools, > no matter the opinion of anyone else. > > > > So now, I am not sure how to proceed. Do you have any suggestions about > resolving the legal situation with regards to the Sun copyright code? Do > you not care? Do you care and have no time to resolve it? Do you have > any other ideas? I know what I will need to do to keep my code legally > distributable but I am not sure if I need to do this completely outside > the SVN. > > Aside from that practical issue, your work today has left a bitter > feeling in my mouth and given me less energy to keep arguing with my > local community that geotools the project is worth the struggle. Do you > have any suggestions for how we could actually collaborate on this > project given our different approaches? > > sadly, > --adrian custer > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > This SF.net email is sponsored by: > SourcForge Community > SourceForge wants to tell your story. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword > _______________________________________________ > Geotools-devel mailing list > Geotools-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by: SourcForge Community SourceForge wants to tell your story. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list Geotools-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
