lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Scott Lombard (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [Lucene.Net] [jira] [Commented] (LUCENENET-380) Evaluate Sharpen as a port tool
Date Tue, 22 Mar 2011 19:10:05 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-380?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13009792#comment-13009792
] 

Scott Lombard commented on LUCENENET-380:
-----------------------------------------

I read the dOCL as one of three licensing options.  From the dOCL:

{quote}You may obtain copies of the Software by download from the Versant website. Software
governed by this Agreement and Software governed by the GPL are obtained from the same source.
For this reason, portions of the Software may be flagged as governed by the GPL license. However,
the terms under which Versant licenses the Software to you depend on your choice of license,
regardless of any GPL notices contained in the Software.{quote}

We are a FLOSS Application: 
{quote}4. Free/Libre and Open Source Software Licenses
Where your FLOSS Application contains software components that were licensed pursuant to one
of the FLOSS licenses set forth below ("FLOSS Licenses"), you may distribute such software
components subject to that pre-existing FLOSS License.
...
b. Apache Software License, versions 1.0, 1.1, or 2.0{quote}

I don't know if our fork will be Derived Software:
{quote}3. Derivative Works
For the purpose of this Agreement, software is deemed a derivative work of the Software ("Derivative
Work") where it is based on the Software, including without limitation in the following circumstances:
a. the software is compiled against the Software;
b. the software contains specific references to the Software;
c. the software requires the Software to work; or
d. the software uses the proprietary API to the Software. {quote}


My concerns are more about the requirement to have a project link on the db4o project website
and who owns the changes to the sharpen.

To keep a GPL license we could not include it in the ASF repository.  The GPL license is acceptable
for using the sharpen fork as build tool for Lucene.Net.  So the fork would become a separate
project and I think would have to be maintained independently of ASF.

What do other projects do?



> Evaluate Sharpen as a port tool
> -------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENENET-380
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-380
>             Project: Lucene.Net
>          Issue Type: Task
>          Components: Build Automation, Lucene.Net Contrib, Lucene.Net Core, Lucene.Net
Demo, Lucene.Net Test
>            Reporter: George Aroush
>            Assignee: Alex Thompson
>         Attachments: 3.0.2_JavaToCSharpConverter_AfterPostProcessing.zip, 3.0.2_JavaToCSharpConverter_NoPostProcessing.zip,
IndexWriter.java, Lucene.Net.3_0_3_Sharpen20110106.zip, Lucene.Net.Sharpen20101104.zip, Lucene.Net.Sharpen20101114.zip,
NIOFSDirectory.java, QueryParser.java, TestBufferedIndexInput.java, TestDateFilter.java
>
>
> This task is to evaluate Sharpen as a port tool for Lucene.Net.
> The files to be evaluated are attached.  We need to run those files (which are off Java
Lucene 2.9.2) against Sharpen and compare the result against JLCA result.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

Mime
View raw message