I've said it on dev@weex, and on private@incubator, but I wanted to make sure and say it here too. Weex should cut the release. We'll figure out the rest later. The straw poll on private@incubator also confirms: you have my support and the support of many of the mentors in the incubator. I apologize for us blocking you for so long.
Best Regards, Myrle Krantz PMC Member, Apache Incubator On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 6:06 AM 申远 <shenyua...@gmail.com> wrote: > It looks like we have got result[1] from Legal VP, I will bring it here now > > 1. It's fine if Weex only could include header files under 2-clause BSD > license from Webkit at compiling time and has a dynamic link to > Webkit.so > at runtime. > 2. It's recommended that excluding Webkit.so from Weex convenience > library. Users would include the code snippet below to include both weex > and webkit. > > <dependency> > > <artifactId>weex_sdk</artifactId> > > </dependency> > > <dependency> > > <artifactId>webkit</artifactId> > > </dependency> > > > The following is what I need to consult from Incubator: > > Google will ban all apps without 64 bit published in Google Play from 1st, > August, 2019 [1]. Though it's a good idea of excluding Webkit.so from > convenience library of Weex, Weex community needs to publish next release > with 64-bit support ASAP to give users enough time to upgrade Weex. I'd > like to remain webkit.so in convenience library of Weex only for next > release. > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-464 > [2] https://developer.android.com/distribute/best-practices/develop/64-bit > > Best Regards, > YorkShen > > 申远 > > > Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org> 于2019年6月24日周一 上午7:32写道： > > > Lets continue this discussion on > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-464 please > > > > On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 2:18 PM Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > 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....@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 <shenyua...@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.841...@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 <bay...@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 <shenyua...@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-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > > > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: > general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Craig L Russell > > > > c...@apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > > > > > > > -- > > > Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > > > >
