Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Teaclave (incubating) v0.5.1-rc.1
Hi, > I opened an issue in https://github.com/dermesser/leveldb-rs/issues/26. > The auther confirmed the original and gave some explanation about the > different license. In general if something is ported to anther language it keeps the same license. It this case both licenses are compatible with the AL v2 so it’s probably only a minor issue. Kind Regards, Justin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Teaclave (incubating) v0.5.1-rc.1
Hi Justin, I opened an issue in https://github.com/dermesser/leveldb-rs/issues/26. The auther confirmed the original and gave some explanation about the different license. Thanks, He On 2023/05/17 07:28:43 Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > > I would need to do a review in more detail to find out what should be added > to LICENSE (and NOTICE) or if there are any other issues. I can see there > further 3rd party software included in your source please than needs to bee > mentioned in LICENSE. > > Re [1] it is under the MIT license but that may not accurate as it states "A > fully compatible implementation of LevelDB in Rust. .. The implementation is > very close to the original; often, you can see the same algorithm translated > 1:1, and class (struct) and method names are similar or the same.”. Given it > is a copy of the original it should be under the same license as the > original. Do you know where the original is? It's odd to me that [2] is BSD > license but this copy is MIT licensed so perhaps that wasn’t the source? > > Kind Regards, > Justin > > 1. https://github.com/dermesser/leveldb-rs > 2. https://github.com/google/leveldb > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Teaclave (incubating) v0.5.1-rc.1
Hi, I would need to do a review in more detail to find out what should be added to LICENSE (and NOTICE) or if there are any other issues. I can see there further 3rd party software included in your source please than needs to bee mentioned in LICENSE. Re [1] it is under the MIT license but that may not accurate as it states "A fully compatible implementation of LevelDB in Rust. .. The implementation is very close to the original; often, you can see the same algorithm translated 1:1, and class (struct) and method names are similar or the same.”. Given it is a copy of the original it should be under the same license as the original. Do you know where the original is? It's odd to me that [2] is BSD license but this copy is MIT licensed so perhaps that wasn’t the source? Kind Regards, Justin 1. https://github.com/dermesser/leveldb-rs 2. https://github.com/google/leveldb - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Teaclave (incubating) v0.5.1-rc.1
Hi Justin, I read your comments carefully and found that the only gap was in ./third_party/rust-sgx-sdk and I am going to fix it soon. - I did not see any license problem with crypto/src/lib.rs or its relation with https://github.com/skalenetwork/sgxwallet/blob/develop/LevelDB.cpp. - The GPL in ./third_party/wamr.patch is from a removed file. We do not add any GPL file in the patch. - common/rusty_leveldb_sgx is modified from https://github.com/dermesser/leveldb-rs that I think is a reimplementation of https://github.com/google/leveldb. - Those different copyright statements from Google, HP, Sun, Intel, Android, Ant Financial, XiaoMi and many many others use SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception. They are from third_party/wasm-micro-runtime. Correct me if I am wrong. Sincerely, He On 2023/05/15 06:55:58 Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > > A search for “General Public License” shows up in these files: > ./third_party/wamr.patch > ./third_party/rust-sgx-sdk/licenses/LICENSE-tlibc.txt > ./third_party/rust-sgx-sdk/licenses/LICENSE-common-inc.txt > ./third_party/rust-sgx-sdk/sgx_backtrace/sgx_backtrace_sys/libbacktrace/ltmain.sh > ./third_party/rust-sgx-sdk/sgx_backtrace/sgx_backtrace_sys/libbacktrace/configure > ./third_party/rust-sgx-sdk/sgx_backtrace/sgx_backtrace_sys/libbacktrace/config.guess > ./third_party/rust-sgx-sdk/sgx_backtrace/sgx_backtrace_sys/libbacktrace/missing > ./third_party/rust-sgx-sdk/sgx_backtrace/sgx_backtrace_sys/libbacktrace/config.sub > > There are also a number of file copyright the Free Software Foundation. (also > in libbacktrace) > > I’ve not looked at each one and the first couple do seem to be false > positives. However this file [1], which might incorrectly has a ASF header on > it, seems to be a 1:1 implementation of this [2]??? Even if it not file that > does look like 3rd party code to me. Do you know where it originally come > from? See also [4]. It seems the original is GPL licensed(?) and porting it > to another language wouldn’t change that. > > This file [2] looks to be licensed (or at least some of it) under the Mozilla > license and that is Category B and can’t be included in a source release. The > very first part of that file is license "Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception” I’m > not sure that would be allowed ether. There are other files wth this license > in the source release. > > The LICENSE list three 3rd party piece of software: > third_party/wasm-micro-runtime > third_party/rust-sgx-sdk > common/rusty_leveldb_sgx > > But there is other 3rd party files in the source release, for instance > libunwind. Note also the number of different copyright statements fm Google, > HP, Sun, Intel, Android, Ant Financial, XiaoMi and many many others. > > Kind Regards, > Justin > > 1. crypto/src/lib.rs > 2. https://github.com/skalenetwork/sgxwallet/blob/develop/LevelDB.cpp > 3. ./third_party/wamr.patch > 4. https://teaclave.apache.org/teaclave/common/rusty_leveldb_sgx/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Teaclave (incubating) v0.5.1-rc.1
HI, Based on this it seems “Apache 2.0 with LLVM exception” is OK, it’s just nt been added to the category A list yet. [1] Kind Regards, Justin 1.https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-494
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Teaclave (incubating) v0.5.1-rc.1
Hi, A search for “General Public License” shows up in these files: ./third_party/wamr.patch ./third_party/rust-sgx-sdk/licenses/LICENSE-tlibc.txt ./third_party/rust-sgx-sdk/licenses/LICENSE-common-inc.txt ./third_party/rust-sgx-sdk/sgx_backtrace/sgx_backtrace_sys/libbacktrace/ltmain.sh ./third_party/rust-sgx-sdk/sgx_backtrace/sgx_backtrace_sys/libbacktrace/configure ./third_party/rust-sgx-sdk/sgx_backtrace/sgx_backtrace_sys/libbacktrace/config.guess ./third_party/rust-sgx-sdk/sgx_backtrace/sgx_backtrace_sys/libbacktrace/missing ./third_party/rust-sgx-sdk/sgx_backtrace/sgx_backtrace_sys/libbacktrace/config.sub There are also a number of file copyright the Free Software Foundation. (also in libbacktrace) I’ve not looked at each one and the first couple do seem to be false positives. However this file [1], which might incorrectly has a ASF header on it, seems to be a 1:1 implementation of this [2]??? Even if it not file that does look like 3rd party code to me. Do you know where it originally come from? See also [4]. It seems the original is GPL licensed(?) and porting it to another language wouldn’t change that. This file [2] looks to be licensed (or at least some of it) under the Mozilla license and that is Category B and can’t be included in a source release. The very first part of that file is license "Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception” I’m not sure that would be allowed ether. There are other files wth this license in the source release. The LICENSE list three 3rd party piece of software: third_party/wasm-micro-runtime third_party/rust-sgx-sdk common/rusty_leveldb_sgx But there is other 3rd party files in the source release, for instance libunwind. Note also the number of different copyright statements fm Google, HP, Sun, Intel, Android, Ant Financial, XiaoMi and many many others. Kind Regards, Justin 1. crypto/src/lib.rs 2. https://github.com/skalenetwork/sgxwallet/blob/develop/LevelDB.cpp 3. ./third_party/wamr.patch 4. https://teaclave.apache.org/teaclave/common/rusty_leveldb_sgx/
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Teaclave (incubating) v0.5.1-rc.1
Hi Justin, Thanks for your comments. Could you please point out which GPL licensed software is included in the release? We have already removed GPL licensed software that we think is GPL. Thanks, He On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 1:04 PM Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > > A quick glance at this release shows it still includes GPL licensed > software. Anything with that's GPL licensed can't be included in a ASF > software release or be a non optional dependancy. What licensing issues > were corrected in this release from the previous one? > > Kind Regards, > Justin > > P.S I'm not subscribe to your list so may not see replies unless you CC me > on them. > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Teaclave (incubating) v0.5.1-rc.1
Hi, A quick glance at this release shows it still includes GPL licensed software. Anything with that's GPL licensed can't be included in a ASF software release or be a non optional dependancy. What licensing issues were corrected in this release from the previous one? Kind Regards, Justin P.S I'm not subscribe to your list so may not see replies unless you CC me on them. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
[VOTE] Release Apache Teaclave (incubating) v0.5.1-rc.1
Hi all, I am pleased to be calling this vote for the release of Apache Teaclave (incubating) 0.5.1 (release candidate 1). The Apache Teaclave (incubating) community has voted and approved the release. The result thread is https://lists.apache.org/thread/knnbbjg8h5y4j3tnochjcz48dbtmmqvs The release candidate to be voted over is available at: - https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/teaclave/0.5.1-rc.1/ The artifacts signed with PGP key [777A1FBA5762313CD86EC2727144C76533763CD9] in the keys file: - https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/teaclave/KEYS The Git commit for this release is: - https://github.com/apache/incubator-teaclave/commit/0d95f05395b95d3efa33ebe8ab85f8175cf209ea The release note is available in: - https://github.com/apache/incubator-teaclave/releases/tag/v0.5.1-rc.1 Build guide and get started instructions can be found at: - https://github.com/apache/incubator-teaclave/blob/v0.5.1-rc.1/docs/my-first-function.md The short version of building Teaclave from the source tarball: ``` $ wget https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/teaclave/0.5.1-rc.1/apache-teaclave-0.5.1-rc.1-incubating.tar.gz $ tar zxvf apache-teaclave-0.5.1-rc.1-incubating.tar.gz && cd \ apache-teaclave-0.5.1-incubating $ # Instructions to verify the source tar: https://teaclave.apache.org/download/#verify-the-integrity-of-the-files $ docker run --rm -v $(pwd):/teaclave -w /teaclave \ -it teaclave/teaclave-build-ubuntu-2004-sgx-2.17.1:0.2.0 \ bash -c ". /root/.cargo/env && \ . /opt/sgxsdk/environment && \ mkdir -p build && cd build && \ cmake -DTEST_MODE=ON -DSGX_SIM_MODE=ON -DGIT_SUBMODULE=OFF .. && \ make -j" ``` The vote will be open for at least 72 hours or until the necessary number of votes are reached. [ ] +1 approve [ ] +0 no opinion [ ] -1 disapprove with the reason Best, He Sun Apache Teaclave (incubating) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
