[jira] [Comment Edited] (TIKA-1581) jhighlight license concerns
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TIKA-1581?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=14371423#comment-14371423
]
Steve Rowe edited comment on TIKA-1581 at 3/20/15 3:02 PM:
---
Interestingly, the JFlex source files ({{\*.flex}}) for the {{\*.java}} files
in question are dual-CDDL-LGPL licensed, so it is theoretically possible to
just regenerate the {{.java}} files (I see a {{jflex}} target in the
{{build.xml}}), and then apply the license from the {{.flex}} files to the
regenerated {{.java}} files. I highly suspect, given this situation, that the
solo LGPL license in the {{.java}} files is simply a mistake.
Note that there is a fork of jhighlight on Github - maybe we can ask them to
fix this issue using the method I describe above, and then switch Tika to using
the fork?: [https://github.com/codelibs/jhighlight]
was (Author: steve_rowe):
Interestingly, the JFlex source files ({{\*.flex}}) for the {{\*.java}} files
in question is dual-CDDL-LGPL licensed, so it is theoretically possible to just
regenerate the {{.java}} files (I see a {{jflex}} target in the {{build.xml}}),
and then apply the license from the {{.flex}} files to the regenerated
{{.java}} files. I highly suspect, given this situation, that the solo LGPL
license in the {{.java}} files is simply a mistake.
Note that there is a fork of jhighlight on Github - maybe we can ask them to
fix this issue using the method I describe above, and then switch Tika to using
the fork?: [https://github.com/codelibs/jhighlight]
jhighlight license concerns
---
Key: TIKA-1581
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TIKA-1581
Project: Tika
Issue Type: Bug
Affects Versions: 1.7
Reporter: Karl Wright
jhighlight jar is a Tika dependency. The Lucene team discovered that, while
it claims to be a CDDL/LGPL dual-license, some of its functionality is LGPL
only:
{code}
Solr's contrib/extraction contains jhighlight-1.0.jar which declares itself
as dual CDDL or LGPL license. However, some of its classes are distributed
only under LGPL, e.g.
com.uwyn.jhighlight.highlighter.
CppHighlighter.java
GroovyHighlighter.java
JavaHighlighter.java
XmlHighlighter.java
I downloaded the sources from Maven
(http://search.maven.org/remotecontent?filepath=com/uwyn/jhighlight/1.0/jhighlight-1.0-sources.jar)
to confirm that, and also found this SVN repo:
http://svn.rifers.org/jhighlight/tags/release-1.0, though the project's
website seems to not exist anymore (https://jhighlight.dev.java.net/).
I didn't find any direct usage of it in our code, so I guess it's probably
needed by a 3rd party dependency, such as Tika. Therefore if we e.g. omit it,
things will compile, but may fail at runtime.
{code}
Is it possible to remove this dependency for future releases, or allow only
optional inclusion of this package? It is of concern to the ManifoldCF
project because we distribute a binary package that includes Tika and its
required dependencies, which currently includes jHighlight.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
[jira] [Comment Edited] (TIKA-1581) jhighlight license concerns
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TIKA-1581?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=14371423#comment-14371423
]
Steve Rowe edited comment on TIKA-1581 at 3/20/15 3:01 PM:
---
Interestingly, the JFlex source files ({{\*.flex}}) for the {{\*.java}} files
in question is dual-CDDL-LGPL licensed, so it is theoretically possible to just
regenerate the {{.java}} files (I see a {{jflex}} target in the {{build.xml}}),
and then apply the license from the {{.flex}} files to the regenerated
{{.java}} files. I highly suspect, given this situation, that the solo LGPL
license in the {{.java}} files is simply a mistake.
Note that there is a fork of jhighlight on Github - maybe we can ask them to
fix this issue using the method I describe above, and then switch Tika to using
the fork?: [https://github.com/codelibs/jhighlight]
was (Author: steve_rowe):
Interestingly, the JFlex source files ({{\*.flex}}) for the {{\*.java}} files
in question is dual-CDDL-LGPL licensed, so it is theoretically possible to just
regenerate the {{.java}} files (I see a {{jflex}} target in the {{build.xml}},
and then apply the license from the {{.flex}} files to the regenerated
{{.java}} files. I highly suspect, given this situation, that the solo LGPL
license in the {{.java}} files is simply a mistake.
Note that there is a fork of jhighlight on Github - maybe we can ask them to
fix this issue using the method I describe above, and then switch Tika to using
the fork?: [https://github.com/codelibs/jhighlight]
jhighlight license concerns
---
Key: TIKA-1581
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TIKA-1581
Project: Tika
Issue Type: Bug
Affects Versions: 1.7
Reporter: Karl Wright
jhighlight jar is a Tika dependency. The Lucene team discovered that, while
it claims to be a CDDL/LGPL dual-license, some of its functionality is LGPL
only:
{code}
Solr's contrib/extraction contains jhighlight-1.0.jar which declares itself
as dual CDDL or LGPL license. However, some of its classes are distributed
only under LGPL, e.g.
com.uwyn.jhighlight.highlighter.
CppHighlighter.java
GroovyHighlighter.java
JavaHighlighter.java
XmlHighlighter.java
I downloaded the sources from Maven
(http://search.maven.org/remotecontent?filepath=com/uwyn/jhighlight/1.0/jhighlight-1.0-sources.jar)
to confirm that, and also found this SVN repo:
http://svn.rifers.org/jhighlight/tags/release-1.0, though the project's
website seems to not exist anymore (https://jhighlight.dev.java.net/).
I didn't find any direct usage of it in our code, so I guess it's probably
needed by a 3rd party dependency, such as Tika. Therefore if we e.g. omit it,
things will compile, but may fail at runtime.
{code}
Is it possible to remove this dependency for future releases, or allow only
optional inclusion of this package? It is of concern to the ManifoldCF
project because we distribute a binary package that includes Tika and its
required dependencies, which currently includes jHighlight.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
[jira] [Comment Edited] (TIKA-1581) jhighlight license concerns
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TIKA-1581?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=14371432#comment-14371432
]
Hong-Thai Nguyen edited comment on TIKA-1581 at 3/20/15 3:10 PM:
-
I've contacted also 'gbe...@uwyn.com', seem that it's his email. Wait for feel
days for his feedback.
Otherwise, we can create an 'unshipped' module to group all parsers and their
dependencies without Apache license.
[~steve_rowe], folked vesion you mentioned don't change anything about original
license terms of JHighlight.
was (Author: thaichat04):
I've contacted also 'gbe...@uwyn.com', seem that it's his email. Wait for feel
days for his feedback.
Otherwise, we can create an 'unshipped' module to group all parsers and their
dependencies without Apache license
jhighlight license concerns
---
Key: TIKA-1581
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TIKA-1581
Project: Tika
Issue Type: Bug
Affects Versions: 1.7
Reporter: Karl Wright
jhighlight jar is a Tika dependency. The Lucene team discovered that, while
it claims to be a CDDL/LGPL dual-license, some of its functionality is LGPL
only:
{code}
Solr's contrib/extraction contains jhighlight-1.0.jar which declares itself
as dual CDDL or LGPL license. However, some of its classes are distributed
only under LGPL, e.g.
com.uwyn.jhighlight.highlighter.
CppHighlighter.java
GroovyHighlighter.java
JavaHighlighter.java
XmlHighlighter.java
I downloaded the sources from Maven
(http://search.maven.org/remotecontent?filepath=com/uwyn/jhighlight/1.0/jhighlight-1.0-sources.jar)
to confirm that, and also found this SVN repo:
http://svn.rifers.org/jhighlight/tags/release-1.0, though the project's
website seems to not exist anymore (https://jhighlight.dev.java.net/).
I didn't find any direct usage of it in our code, so I guess it's probably
needed by a 3rd party dependency, such as Tika. Therefore if we e.g. omit it,
things will compile, but may fail at runtime.
{code}
Is it possible to remove this dependency for future releases, or allow only
optional inclusion of this package? It is of concern to the ManifoldCF
project because we distribute a binary package that includes Tika and its
required dependencies, which currently includes jHighlight.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
[jira] [Comment Edited] (TIKA-1581) jhighlight license concerns
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TIKA-1581?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=14371432#comment-14371432
]
Hong-Thai Nguyen edited comment on TIKA-1581 at 3/20/15 3:36 PM:
-
I've contacted also 'gbe...@uwyn.com', seem that it's his email. Wait for feel
days for his feedback.
Otherwise, we can create an 'unshipped' module to group all parsers and their
dependencies without Apache license.
was (Author: thaichat04):
I've contacted also 'gbe...@uwyn.com', seem that it's his email. Wait for feel
days for his feedback.
Otherwise, we can create an 'unshipped' module to group all parsers and their
dependencies without Apache license.
[~steve_rowe], folked vesion you mentioned don't change anything about original
license terms of JHighlight.
jhighlight license concerns
---
Key: TIKA-1581
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TIKA-1581
Project: Tika
Issue Type: Bug
Affects Versions: 1.7
Reporter: Karl Wright
jhighlight jar is a Tika dependency. The Lucene team discovered that, while
it claims to be a CDDL/LGPL dual-license, some of its functionality is LGPL
only:
{code}
Solr's contrib/extraction contains jhighlight-1.0.jar which declares itself
as dual CDDL or LGPL license. However, some of its classes are distributed
only under LGPL, e.g.
com.uwyn.jhighlight.highlighter.
CppHighlighter.java
GroovyHighlighter.java
JavaHighlighter.java
XmlHighlighter.java
I downloaded the sources from Maven
(http://search.maven.org/remotecontent?filepath=com/uwyn/jhighlight/1.0/jhighlight-1.0-sources.jar)
to confirm that, and also found this SVN repo:
http://svn.rifers.org/jhighlight/tags/release-1.0, though the project's
website seems to not exist anymore (https://jhighlight.dev.java.net/).
I didn't find any direct usage of it in our code, so I guess it's probably
needed by a 3rd party dependency, such as Tika. Therefore if we e.g. omit it,
things will compile, but may fail at runtime.
{code}
Is it possible to remove this dependency for future releases, or allow only
optional inclusion of this package? It is of concern to the ManifoldCF
project because we distribute a binary package that includes Tika and its
required dependencies, which currently includes jHighlight.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
