Board
As suggested, we posted our request on the GeoTools mailing list
(http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=29572383). The
GeoTools PMC had a meeting Monday, which resulted in 2 "inclined yes"
votes, 2 "inclined no" votes and one proposal to re-license GeoTools
too. We do not know yet the final GeoTools PMC decision, neither we saw
any reply to our request from the OSGeo board. Consequently I would like
to recall a few points, and make one proposal (note: my willing is not
to create contentious, but to insist on open source spirit in a context
where two projects are facing strategic steps):
1. We granted copyright to OSGeo, not to GeoTools.
2. When we granted copyright, we understood that OSGeo would have the
duty to behave according its charter, which is not to protect the
economical interests of some members or to favour one particular
project at the expense of an other project.
3. We were willing to trim every code not written by ourselves (while
of course we prefer not having to - see proposal below).
4. GeoTools contains thousands of lines of code written by ourselves -
when we left, we were the authors of 40% of GeoTools 2.6 code base.
5. If OSGeo requires GeoTools permission for re-licensing our code,
then conversely we assume that GeoTools needs our agreement for
re-licensing our above-cited work.
Considering that some peoples considered to re-license GeoTools as part
of their plan to join LocationTech (Eclipse), we would like to reach an
agreement around the following proposal: OSGeo allows re-licensing of
the full Geotoolkit.org code base to Apache 2, including the work
derived from other contributors in GeoTools 2.6 (as of 2008, it was 5%
of lines of code in the "core" modules and an undetermined percentage in
the "pending" modules - we can compute this number if it is considered
necessary for reaching an agreement). In return, we give our agreement
for re-licensing any work we committed on the GeoTools SVN (both OSGeo
and SourceForge), at any time in the history under any license that the
GeoTools PMC wishes. From an "amount of lines of code" point of view, I
don't think that GeoTools would be deserved by such deal.
Martin
Le 20/07/12 23:37, Cameron Shorter a écrit :
Martin, board,
(talking as a non-board member)
I recommend that the course of action should be:
1. Note that OSGeo's commitment is to support projects, and support
Open Source use for projects.
2. Note that there are 2 projects with a vested interest in this
decision, GeoTools and Geotoolkit.
3. Note that the board would in principle be in a position to support
Geotoolkit's request, as it is a request to use an Open Source licence
(which part of OSGeo's charter)
4. However, before making a decision, the board, and/or Martin, should
approach the GeoTools community, and ask for comment, in particular
ask the GeoTools community if there are any grounds for objection
which might revolve around how GeoTools might be adversely effected by
such a license change.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
GeoTools-Devel mailing list
GeoTools-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
