Let me clarify this for
you and other PMC members. This topic was actively discussed with Mike and Bjorn few years ago, but as far as
Technology PMC members changed last year I should provide an update.
We faced with licensing
problem since initial project commit. Our project consists of two parts: Subversive itself and SVN connectors -
libraries we use for SVN access. There are two libraries - pure Java SVNKit and
native JavaHL. The first one is a standalone library with its own
EPL-incompatible license. JavaHL is a part
of SVN project that has EPL compatible license (Apache license). But JavaHL
includes licenses with GPL licenses (Neon library) that makes it
Once the problem was
detected by the legal team during project migration to Eclipse it was agreed
with Bjorn, Mike and legal team that
JavaHL is declared as "exempt pre-req" and SVNKit is declared as
"works with" external dependencies that should be distributed from
extrnal location (Polarion site). This solution allowed us to start development on Eclipse and join Simultaneous
releases. But legal issues with SVN connectors that are required part of project, Subversive can't complete graduation
and become a candidate for inclusion into standard distribution.
to resolve the problem
The legal blocker was
really annoying for us, so in 2008 and 2009 we tried to resolve it. We had few
meetings with Bjorn and Mike on
EclipseCons to discuss next steps, but unfortunately the legal problem was too
complicated to be resolved. The
slide #15 shows agreed plan from that time. Then we decided to try resolve the
problem from another side and contacted SVN team reporting license issues. Actually
license compatibility issue was also important for SVN team and they had in
plans to replace GPL-licensed Neon library by LGPL-licensed library. It seems
to will happen this year when SVN 1.7 will be resolved.
At the current moment
there are no technical issues with the project distribution. It's distributed
from 2 sites (eclipse and polarion), but Connectors Discovery feature helps to
make project installation painless for end-users.
I also updated slide
#15 (re-download from http://www.eclipse.org/subversive/publications/Subversive-Indigo-Review.pdf)
to reflect the current situation and highlight potential problem solution after
SVN 1.7 release.
On Behalf Of Wayne Beaton
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 12:21
Subject: Re: [technology-pmc]
Subversive release review for Indigo
Hi Igor. How do you define "required" in
"Board allows GPL code to be required" on slide 15? Is this different
from the Workswith dependency the project already has on SVNKit?
FWIW, the "Board allows GPL code to be distributed from eclipse.org"
option is a non-starter.
On 05/30/2011 02:06 PM, Igor Vinnykov wrote:
technology-pmc mailing list