[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Possible problematic terms of use of OSGi library

On 2015-12-09 02:18, Mikołaj Izdebski wrote:

On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 1:01 PM, Arnaud Vandyck <avandyck@gmail.com> wrote:

I was on my way trying to package org.osgi.core 6 and before downloading I
have to agree with this page:

https://www.osgi.org/developer/downloads/release-6/release-6-no-form/

In the "License Grant", it seems that it could be problematic to package
osgi in Debian. Am I right?

Any thoughts?


My thoughts on this matter:

OSGi code can be consider part of specification, which is non-free.
Downloading code from upstream page requires accepting non-free
license first. Upstream website does not have a separate license page
for code accompanying the specification.

License headers alone can't be used as authoritative information about
licensing of the project as a whole. Many projects don't add their own
copyright headers, but retain headers of files coming from other
projects they forked or bundled.

So IMHO licensing and DFSG status of OSGi code is not clear. Other
GNU/Linux distros (at least Fedora and RHEL) decided against packaging
and distributing any code from OSGi alliance.
LICENSE file attached in the root of the distributed jar is APACHE-2; in the about.html file, there is a quote about the license: 

	"The OSGi Alliance makes available all content in this jar
	("Work").  Unless otherwise indicated below, the Work is
	provided to you under the terms and conditions of the
	Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License")"
I maybe sent the mail too early, I should look at the jar and provide all the informations. 

Cheers,

--
Arnaud Vandyck
http://about.me/avdyk
Reply to: