On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 08:51:41AM +0100, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote: > OSGi libraries are widely used and I made several attempts to package > them. From what I remember there are two main problems: > > 1. In order to download anything from upstream site [1] you need to > accept proprietary license first. It was described above in more detail. > > 2. There is no source code provided (understood as preferable form for > editing, as defined in Open Source Definition, or in the Apache License > itself). Code included in *-sources.jar files is not source code - there > are no build instructions, test cases or such there - only pure Java > code, which is meant primarily for debugging. They have a Github account > [2], but it does *not* contain code for most common OSGi libraries. I > failed to find any documentation on how source code can be obtained. > > So to answer your question: we don't need to package anything except > software which is (supposedly) under Apache License, but we are not sure > whether (1) there are additional non-free licensing terms besides the > Apache License that apply to the software, making it non-free, Any Apache License-covered code in the source jar should be treated as licensed solely under that license. Therefore, once you actually have that code, it is free software. > and (2) > whether the software actually meets definitions of free software and > Open Source Definition - requirement of source code availability is > questionable here. I'm assuming the issue here is a Fedora packaging issue, right? If buildable source code is not available, that itself is a Fedora packaging problem, independent of any licensing concerns. One could always take the Apache-licensed source files and attempt to fork the libraries in question (in part because of the answer to the first question). Richard _______________________________________________ legal mailing list legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
