Subj : Re: Cocoon's Rhino+continuations fork To : netscape.public.mozilla.jseng From : Steven Noels Date : Wed Mar 10 2004 08:51 pm On 09 Mar 2004, at 19:38, Brian Behlendorf wrote: > On Mon, 8 Mar 2004, Steven Noels wrote: >> This is troubled partly by the license status of Rhino itself. Upon >> personal investigation a while ago, I found some source files which >> where licensed using the NPL1.1 >> (http://lxr.mozilla.org/mozilla/source/js/rhino/src/org/mozilla/ >> javascript/Context.java), while others used the newer MPL1.1 >> (http://lxr.mozilla.org/mozilla/source/js/rhino/src/org/mozilla/ >> javascript/ClassCache.java). I think it is safe to state that the >> intended overall license of Rhino was the tri-license combo MPL >> 1.1/GPL >> 2.0/LGPL 2.1 - which seems to be OK for redistribution as a library >> with an ASF project according to the unofficial ASF license FAQ @ >> http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?Licensing > > No. No no no. You may not relicense MPL or NPL software under the > Apache > license, whether 1.1 or 2.0, unless you (or the collective-you) are the > copyright holders. Just to get this point clear: we never suggested that we could simply change the license of Rhino as non-copyright holders, and "just make it ASL". I was thinking that the license terms of the MPL1.1 (which seems to be the more liberal of the tri-license) didn't impose any extra requirements outside the ASL scope for projects shipping a *library* version of Rhino or a derivate of Rhino. It has never been the intention to move the sourcecode of Chris' fork to ASF CVS - not only because of legal and ownership issues, but primarily because it ain't a community project. The intention was to find legal clarity for the sourcecode of the forked version, hosted *outside* ASF CVS - and to check out whether we could ship a compiled and packaged library version of (a forked version of) Rhino with Cocoon. At the same time, we are interested in convergence with the Rhino trunk version, but I'm afraid that (a) we would be the only folks interested in seeing continuations inside Rhino ATM, and (b) no-one is volunteering to do the painful refactoring & remerging anyhow. And while we were at it, we figured to kindly nag the Rhino folks to change their license to the same level of liberality as ours. Admittedly, interlocking all these actions brings a whole lot of problems together. (OT for the non-ASF folks:) You seem to suggest that inclusion of non-ASL-licensed library dependencies inside ASF distributions should be deprecated, favoring a CPAN or FreeBSD ports -like mechanism instead. This will definitely lower the ease of use for end-users, which have been complaining already that we don't ship a binary distribution of Cocoon, let alone that we would ship a download which requires them to either hunt down additional packages themselves, or have an internet connection when installing Cocoon. -- Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/ Outerthought - Open Source Java & XML An Orixo Member Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/ stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org .