Got it. Thank you! The URL will be helpful in this case then. Thanks, Cem Karan
> -----Original Message----- > From: License-discuss [mailto:license-discuss-boun...@opensource.org] On > Behalf Of Kevin Fleming > Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2017 2:05 PM > To: license-discuss@opensource.org > Subject: Re: [License-discuss] [Non-DoD Source] Re: OSI equivalent > > All active links contained in this email were disabled. Please verify the > identity of the sender, and confirm the authenticity of all links > contained within the message prior to copying and pasting the address to a > Web browser. > > > ________________________________ > > > > I see the image in his email, so it was indeed sent out by the list server. > It must have been eaten by something on your end, unfortunately. > It might be best to send a URL to where it can be found instead. > > > On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Karan, Cem F CIV USARMY RDECOM ARL (US) > <cem.f.karan....@mail.mil < Caution- > mailto:cem.f.karan....@mail.mil > > wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: License-discuss > [Caution-mailto:license-discuss-boun...@opensource.org < > Caution-mailto:license-discuss- > boun...@opensource.org > ] On Behalf Of Christopher Sean Morrison > > Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2017 1:06 PM > > To: License Discussion Mailing List <license-discuss@opensource.org < > Caution-mailto:license-discuss@opensource.org > > > > Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [License-discuss] OSI equivalent > > > > On Feb 15, 2017, at 11:58 AM, Karan, Cem F CIV USARMY RDECOM > ARL (US) <cem.f.karan....@mail.mil < Caution- > mailto:cem.f.karan....@mail.mil > < Caution- > > Caution-mailto:cem.f.karan....@mail.mil < > Caution-mailto:cem.f.karan....@mail.mil > > > wrote: > > > > Does OSI have a license compatibility chart for the various > approved licenses? > > Something similar to > Caution-Caution-https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html < Caution- > https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html > < > Caution-Caution-https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license- < Caution- > https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license- > > > list.html > ? Our > > researchers are pulling in code from all kinds of sources, and > we want to keep > > them out of legal hot water, and a compatibility chart would be > helpful for > > this. > > > > > > > > > > Hi Cem, > > > > There are a variety out on the web but nothing officially sanctioned > because the devil is in the details when you talk about > compatibility. > > It depends heavily on whether you are integrating, modifying, or > simply using (unmodified) the 3rd party code. Creating a > combined work > > is not necessarily the same as creating a derivative work is not the > same as just linking against something. There are different > > compatibility concerns with each. > > > > For example, I can create an LGPL program that uses an Apache 2.0 > library just fine, and distribute it as a combined work > without too > > much concern. I can also create an Apache 2.0 program that links to > an LGPL library, but I’d have to be more careful with how > the LGPL > > library is linked (assuming there is no link exception granted) and > used — no muddling of the code waters or my program > becomes LGPL > > too. It’s a fair bit more complex with the strongly protective / > viral licenses. > > > > The attached image by Dr. David Wheeler (renowned Mil-OSS security > researcher) is a reasonable starting point that you can > find readily > > around the web in various forms. The flow diagram is basically > describing code compatibility in the most general terms, about > how/where > > code can migrate and/or be relicensed. E.g., I can’t take an MIT > code and distribute it as public domain; but I can take a public > domain > > code and distribute it as MIT. Note it’s NOT referring to simple > usage or linking, otherwise it might falsely lead you to think you > can’t link > > against an Apache 2.0 library in a GPLv2 work. > > > > Cheers! > > Sean > > I was afraid of that... and so is our Legal department :(. We want to > issue good general guidance to everyone in our workforce, > but at the moment that appears to be 'go talk with Legal'. > > As for the image by Dr. Wheeler, it doesn't seem to have come through; > can you try resending it? > > Thanks, > Cem Karan > > _______________________________________________ > License-discuss mailing list > License-discuss@opensource.org < > Caution-mailto:License-discuss@opensource.org > > > Caution-https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss > < Caution-https://lists.opensource.org/cgi- > bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss > > > >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
