incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Branko ─îibej <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite (Incubating) 1.0-RC3
Date Sat, 21 Mar 2015 09:47:57 GMT
On 21.03.2015 05:25, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 7:33 PM, Marvin Humphrey <>
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 6:53 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan
>> <> wrote:
>>> I think we made a mistake and imported the wrong version of the source
>>> code. The same version is provided here by Doug Lee without the GPL
>>> headers, but only with Public Domain header:
>>> I guess we will have to resubmit the release, unless you can accept it in
>>> the current shape. Please advise.
>> If the files don't contain any GPL IP, then what we have is a "licensing
>> documentation bug": there's public domain IP which is perfectly fine to
>> include, but it's misleadingly labeled.  Shipping a release which contains
>> such IP does not pose any legal problems.
>> Contrast that with a licensing error, such as GPL IP onto which someone has
>> slapped an ALv2 header.  Shipping such a release could leave users and
>> redistributors open to a claim of copyright violation.
>> Licensing documentation bugs can vary from inconsequential to catastrophic
>> depending on how badly they mislead downstream consumers.  It seems to me
>> that
>> while this one might cause alarm, it shouldn't cause anybody to do anything
>> illegal.  So long as you are *certain* that those *exact* versions of the
>> files are available under Doug Lea's public domain dedication and contain
>> no
>> GPL mods, I think it's OK.
> Thanks for quick response.
> I am *certain* because these files were initially grabbed from Doug Lea's
> JSR 166 page. The wrong license headers were added by mistake.

Do you happen to know exactly which versions of those files were
imported? I looked at the ConcurrentHashMap implementation and compared
the current version on that site:

with the one in the Ignite release package, and the differences are far
larger than just license header changes:

Sorry, I should've checked this much earlier ...

I would suggest to *not* just remove the license headers in those files.
Instead, delete the current files and import a fresh set directly from
the repository at, then mention in NOTICE that they
were imported from there, not from OpenJDK. Also please add a README
file to the directory where those files are imported and note the exact
versions of the imported files (maybe best to just list the ViewCVS
download URLs, like the one above).

Once you've imported the original files, you can, e.g., change the
package name and make other minor modifications. The point is to have an
audit trail of changes from the public-domain original to whatever we
ship; currently, the Git log shows no such trail.

-- Brane

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message