incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: LGPL dependency
Date Sat, 22 Jun 2019 21:18:35 GMT
WebKit dates back to KHTML, an LGPL web engine from KDE. It sounds like
it’s some WebKit specific files that are BSD licensed. I haven’t inspected
the individual files, but I suspect that the header files are BSD licensed
to make linking less of a legal headache.

On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 07:11, Craig Russell <apache.clr@gmail.com> wrote:

> The Webkit license page https://webkit.org/licensing-webkit/ says
> portions licensed under LGPL and BSD licenses.
>
> Usually this means it's the user's choice which license to use.
>
> We would choose the BSD License for the components that we use.
>
> Can you find anywhere a statement that the Webkit.so is licensed only
> under LGPL?
>
> Craig
>
> > On Jun 14, 2019, at 1:40 AM, 申远 <shenyuancs@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > 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 implementation.
> > Perhaps?
> >
> > As for alternative dependency, it's possible if we make some major
> changes
> > to Weex. But convenience binary of each Weex release includes Webkit.so,
> > how to solve that problem? Maybe publish two convenience binary, one
> named
> > Weex_WebKit.aar and the other named Weex_BSDKit.aar ? Not sounds like a
> > good idea to me.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > YorkShen
> >
> > 申远
> >
> >
> > Sheng Wu <wu.sheng.841108@gmail.com> 于2019年6月14日周五 下午4:23写道:
> >
> >> 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
> >> license first(or already accepted).
> >> But user could use ShardingSphere with PostgreSQL JDBC Driver.
> >>
> >>
> >> Sheng Wu
> >> Apache Skywalking, ShardingSphere, Zipkin
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> 在 2019年6月14日,下午4:15,Hen <bayard@apache.org> 写道:
> >>>
> >>> 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 for users.
> >>>
> >>> (seem to have to  =>  this is how we've discussed the license; an
> actual
> >>> court may decide something completely different)
> >>>
> >>> Looking at Weex's website's description, it does not seem to be that a
> >> user
> >>> of Weex will already have agreed to the terms of Webkit; thus I believe
> >>> they would be unpleasantly surprised.
> >>>
> >>> Hen
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 12:49 AM 申远 <shenyuancs@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> 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 hear advice from incubator that whether our actions below
> would
> >> fix
> >>>> the Category X issue.
> >>>>
> >>>> First of all, License for Webkit is complicated, as it's said that
> >> "WebKit
> >>>> is open source software with portions licensed under the LGPL and BSD
> >>>> licenses available here." [1].
> >>>>
> >>>> Now, Weex includes 1500 header files( .h files) from Webkit at
> compiling
> >>>> stage and around 150 of the are under BSD License. At runtime, Weex
> will
> >>>> dynamic links to the shared library of Webkit.
> >>>>
> >>>> After some major change, Weex could just include around 50 headers(.h
> >>>> files) at compiling stage and all of them are under BSD license. At
> >>>> runtime, Weex still needs to dynamic links to the shared library of
> >> Webkit
> >>>> as before.
> >>>>
> >>>> As Webkit is under dual license, and it's almost impossible for us to
> >>>> figure out whether there is an function call chain like
> >>>> Weex.apiA->Webkit.BSD.apiB->Webkit.BSD.apiC->Webkit.LGPL.apiD.
I'd
> like
> >> to
> >>>> know our proposed change is enough to fix the Category X dependency.
> >>>>
> >>>> [1] https://webkit.org/licensing-webkit/
> >>>>
> >>>> Best Regards,
> >>>> YorkShen
> >>>>
> >>>> 申远
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >>
> >>
>
> Craig L Russell
> clr@apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
> --
Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>

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