Re: [orbit-dev] RE: Bugfixing 3rd party code due to lack of a release?

[Adrian Cho <Adrian_Cho@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Sorry to jump but just to add my $0.02:

If you're going to get them to dual-license it under the Apache and Eclipse
licenses then you can obviously take it under the Apache and incorporate it
into an Apache file.  Interestingly, if you read the Eclipse.org Terms of
Use which governs all contributions through any of the Eclipse.org
website/server channels (e.g. Bugzilla, CVS, mailing lists, newsgroups,
etc.) you'll see in the fourth last paragraph that it was setup so that if
anybody contributes a modification to something we are maintaining under a
license other than the EPL, then they contribute under that license (e.g.
Apache in this case) + EPL.

Adrian

Adrian Cho
Development Manager, Intellectual Property
IBM Ottawa Lab
adrian_cho@xxxxxxxxxx
External: (613) 726-5536
Tie:  654-5536


                                                                           
             "Oberhuber,                                                   
             Martin"                                                       
             <Martin.Oberhuber                                          To 
             @windriver.com>           "Janet Campbell"                    
             Sent by:                  <janet.campbell@xxxxxxxxxxx>,       
             orbit-dev-bounces         "Orbit Developer discussion"        
             @eclipse.org              <orbit-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>             
                                                                        cc 
                                                                           
             09/12/2007 12:28                                      Subject 
             PM                        [orbit-dev] RE: Bugfixing 3rd party 
                                       code due to lack of a release?      
                                                                           
             Please respond to                                             
              Orbit Developer                                              
                discussion                                                 
             <orbit-dev@eclips                                             
                  e.org>                                                   
                                                                           
                                                                           




Hi Janet,

thanks a lot for that quick response.

Just to clarify, can you comment on what
Adrian Cho wrote earlier today on the
orbit-dev list:

As far as the license goes - what you're suggesting - getting the
contribution under the EPL actually makes it more problematic.  You
can't
take EPL code and dump it into the middle of an Apache licensed file.
That
doesn't make much sense.  In general even if there are cases where
licenses
are compatible, we usually maintain only one license per file otherwise
it
can get very unwieldy and confusing (e.g. lines 10 - 15 are XYZ license,
license 20 - 95 are ABC license, etc.).

My personal feeling is that the resulting
code (original file + applied patch) would
be APL, because (APL + (APL+EPL)) == APL,
but also having it as EPL give us a
safety net. What do you think?

For the CQ, I wanted to file it but I'm blocked due to
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=203098
IPZilla Login Failure when trying to submit a CQ through the Portal

Thanks,
--
Martin Oberhuber
Wind River Systems, Inc.
Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member
http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Janet Campbell [mailto:janet.campbell@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 6:22 PM
> To: 'Bjorn Freeman-Benson'; Oberhuber, Martin
> Cc: 'Orbit Developer discussion'
> Subject: RE: Bugfixing 3rd party code due to lack of a release?
>
> Hi Martin,
>
> Yes, please have the author attach the code to a bug with an
> indication that
> they are submitting the contribution under the terms of the
> EPL and enter an
> associated CQ for the requirement.   We'll expedite our review.
>
> Thanks,
> Janet
_______________________________________________
orbit-dev mailing list
orbit-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/orbit-dev