On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 05:37:48PM +0000, jonathon wrote: > That is why I wrote: « During coding, source code licenses are verified > to be what was expected, and what was advertised.» > > By way of example, if I'm planning a project that requires Big Data > Analysis, and needs to scale up from petabytes of data, currently, I can > safely assume that Apache Hadoop uses a standard Apache License. > If this proposal takes place, I'll have to look at the license and > notice for every file in Hadoop, during the project planning stage, as > well as during the coding. > For a project planner, the difference is spending 30 minutes playing > with something from The Apache Foundation, to see if it "works" and > spending hours, ^1 verifying that the licenses are what they purport to > be, before spending any time playing with the software, determining > suitability for the project. And then during the coding process, > somebody will have to spend time verifying that the licenses are what > they were purported to be, and checked out as being, during the project > planning stage. > > ^1: I am aware of software that reads License and Notice files, to > determine that they conform with known, accepted, licenses. However, > that software can overlook bizarre clauses.
[replying with my @gmail, just to be clear I'm not speaking for anyone besides myself] Not for nothing, but this is starting to feel more like an ASF thread. This feels like a political issue the ASF should address on their own; this thread (purely) being on license-discuss strikes me as odd, could we move this to the relevant Apache list(s)? This isn't really a license issue at all (since combining works, even when not mere aggregation) from Apache2 and LGPL3+/GPL3+ is totally fine, just results in the combined work distributed under the terms of the LGPL/GPL. So, this is really a question for ASF if they wish to allow this on a policy and political level (for either combined work(s) or mere aggregations - or both!) Much love, Paul -- :wq
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss