rpms/perl-KinoSearch/devel LICENSING.mbox,NONE,1.1

[Lubomir Rintel]

Author: lkundrak

Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/perl-KinoSearch/devel
In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv26570

Added Files:
	LICENSING.mbox 
Log Message:
Add mail from upstream


--- NEW FILE LICENSING.mbox ---
>From marvin at rectangular.com Mon Mar 23 01:37:59 2009
Received: by norkia.v3.sk (Postfix, from userid 99) id 718E880147; Mon, 23
 Mar 2009 01:37:59 +0100 (CET)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on norkia.v3.sk
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=RDNS_NONE autolearn=no
 version=3.2.5
X-Greylist: delayed 2343 by SQLgrey-1.7.5
Received: from rectangular.com (unknown [68.116.38.202]) (using TLSv1 with
 cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by
 norkia.v3.sk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8320C80148 for <lkundrak at v3.sk>; Mon,
 23 Mar 2009 00:37:50 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from marvin by rectangular.com with local (Exim 4.63)
 (envelope-from <marvin at rectangular.com>) id 1LlXbT-0000Zw-2E for
 lkundrak at v3.sk; Sun, 22 Mar 2009 17:01:19 -0700
Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 17:01:19 -0700
To: Lubomir Rintel <lkundrak at v3.sk>
Subject: FW: [Re: KinoSearch licensing and Fedora]
Message-ID: <20090323000118.GA2217 at rectangular.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)
From: Marvin Humphrey <marvin at rectangular.com>
X-Evolution-Source: imap://lkundrak%40v3.sk@mail.v3.sk/
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Lubomir,

Here you go...

Marvin Humphrey

----- Forwarded message from marvin -----

To: Ian Burrell <ianburrell at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: KinoSearch licensing and Fedora

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 04:21:04PM -0800, Ian Burrell wrote:
> I am trying to package KinoSearch for Fedora.  There were some
> questions in the review[1] about the licensing.  My understanding is
> that KinoSearch is licensed under the GPL or Aristic.  My impression
> is that it doesn't contain any code licensed under ASL 2.0.  

Correct.  It is all either original code or derived code, and all licensed
under GPL or Artistic.  I've been quite conscientious about never copying and
pasting anything directly from Lucene, including documentation and comments.
That allows me to claim a separate copyright and distribute the project under
different but compatible licensing terms.

> But that since it was derived from Lucene, it has to include the Apache
> license text.

That's correct, as per ASL 2.0 section 4.1.

> Is this right?  Is everything in KinoSearch licensed as "GPL+ or
> Artistic"?  Does the Apache license need to be included in the binary
> package to satisfy the ASL?

IANAL but... 

I think so.  I've always assumed that derivations/redistributions of
derivations still need to maintain compatibility with the license terms of the
original -- otherwise the original author would quickly lose control of their
work.  It seems to me that you need to determine whether the GPLv3 your
derivative work will be distributed under is compatible with both the
KinoSearch license terms (which it obviously is) and the Lucene license terms
-- which ought to be the case so long as you include that file and the
existing notice embedded in the KinoSearch documentation.

Best,

Marvin Humphrey

----- End forwarded message -----