Some things I don't think have been mentioned in this thread so far:
1) Even if you make Webkit optional by offering V8, I believe the ASF criteria
for "optional" includes "less than half of your users will use that option" and
so if Webkit offers better performance and most of the users
Hi Greg,
I agree. A pragmatic, incremental, trust in a community’s best intentions is
all we should ask.
To me the minimum requirements are:
(1) License is AL v2.
(2) Disclaimer is standard. I don’t want it to vary because then we’ll discuss
correctness.
(3) Signature.
(4) Checksum.
The rest
Hi -
> On Jun 14, 2019, at 5:08 AM, York Shen wrote:
>
> It depends on the definition of optional dependency. Weex targets iOS,
> Android and Browser environment and Webkit header files and shared library
> are only bundled for Android environment. As for other environments, the OS
> or
Hi Merle,
A footnote on your list below.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jun 14, 2019, at 2:39 AM, Myrle Krantz wrote:
>
> I feel like the answers provided here up till now are too simple. I
> believe we have projects at Apache which seem to be using, or have used
> Webkit: (
>
Hello all,
The IPMC vote for releasing Apache OpenWhisk Runtime Node.js v1.14.0
(incubating) is now closed.
Vote result:
3 (+1 binding) (Bertrand Delacretaz, Sobkowiak Krzysztof, Justin Mclean)
0 ( 0 binding)
0 (-1 binding)
The vote has PASSED.
Thank you everyone for taking the time to review
It depends on the definition of optional dependency. Weex targets iOS, Android
and Browser environment and Webkit header files and shared library are only
bundled for Android environment. As for other environments, the OS or browser
itself has exposed enough API for Weex.
PS: I am pretty sure
Hi,
> Well, what if Weex copies some BSD header files in Webkit then run on Webkit?
> IMHO, the Webkit is also an environment for Weex in this case.
You still didi not answer if this is an optional dependancy? But again either
way I suggest you ask on legal discuss.
Thanks,
Justin
Hi,
> Well, what if Weex copies some BSD header files in Webkit then run on Webkit?
> IMHO, the Webkit is also an environment for Weex in this case.
Not the same situation I’m sorry. Webkit and was not a required dependancy and
no code form it was in the code base. I would need to double
Well, what if Weex copies some BSD header files in Webkit then run on Webkit?
IMHO, the Webkit is also an environment for Weex in this case.
Best Regards,
York Shen
申远
> 在 2019年6月14日，18:37，Justin Mclean 写道：
>
> Hi,
>
>> So this question may have been seen before. Justin, one of the
Just as a quick follow up, I watched this YouTube recording of a session I
did last year on the NetBeans move to Apache again today and, it's been a
while since I watched it last, but I think it still really nails it in
terms of the pain/gain continuum of transitioning a project to Apache, in
all
On Thu, Jun 13, 2019, 18:57 Justin Mclean wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > Boring imo. You have to try hard to screw up Cat B (though I’ve seen it
> > done).
>
> Really? Category B source code is generally not allowed in sources
> releases. It's actually Category X. Category B as image and the like is
>
Hi,
> So this question may have been seen before. Justin, one of the projects
> which seems to currently be using Webkit is Flex. Given the weird
> part-by-part licensing, how did Flex justify it's decision? Or am I
> misreading, and Webkit is just an environment for Flex?
It just an
I feel like the answers provided here up till now are too simple. I
believe we have projects at Apache which seem to be using, or have used
Webkit: (
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-232?jql=text%20~%20%22webkit%22
)
* Flex
* Myfaces
* Shindig (?)
* Cordova
* Wave
* Corinthia
*
>
> Sorry to say, you have to
> 1. Make that clear(I agree it is hard to do, even harder to recheck for
> incubator, hope don’t need to do that)
> Or
> 2. Seek for an alternative.
Option 1 is not realistic. However, Weex could switch from Webkit
dependency to V8 [1] which is under BSD License.
Inline.
Sheng Wu
Apache Skywalking, ShardingSphere, Zipkin
> 在 2019年6月14日，下午4:40，申远 写道：
>
> As mentioned above, Webkit is under dual License(BSD and LPGL) and it's
> almost impossible for us to figure out which function is a pure BSD
> function. I don't know
>
Hi,
> As mentioned above, Webkit is under dual License(BSD and LPGL)
It that was the was you would be OK dual licensed usually mean you can choose
the license you want to use. Sadly as you say this is not the case here but
"WebKit is open source software with portions licensed under the LGPL
As mentioned above, Webkit is under dual License(BSD and LPGL) and it's
almost impossible for us to figure out which function is a pure BSD
function. I don't know
Weex.apiA->Webkit.BSD.apiB->Webkit.BSD.apiC->Webkit.LGPL will happen or
not. Perhaps pure BSD header file will lead to pure BSD
Hi York
I am not a C/C++ coder, so I could be wrong.
But from I saw, Catalog X dependency required is not right. Like Hen said,
alternative is an option.
Such as
Today’s another incubating project, ShardingSphere.
When user wants to MySQL sharing, then they needs to accept MySQL Driver
Assuming Weex requires Webkit and is unable to work with an alternative,
the issue here is that users of Weex would seem to have to permit reverse
engineering in their legal terms. Our position has been that that goes
beyond the scope of the Apache 2.0 license and would be an unpleasant
surprise
>
> In the link your shared, there is this
> > For example, if you distribute copies of the library, whether gratis or
> for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that we gave you.
> You must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the source code.
This is just the content of
Hi,
In the link your shared, there is this
> For example, if you distribute copies of the library, whether gratis or for a
> fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that we gave you. You must
> make sure that they, too, receive or can get the source code.
This is not compatible with
Hi,
I am a PPMC member of Apache Weex. After serious reviewing of our
dependencies, I found there some of the source code we copied from Webkit
is actually under LGPL license(Category X) and our license format tools
changed the license header of these files to Apache v2 incorrectly. I'd
like to
22 matches
Mail list logo
