Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [technology-pmc] Subversive release review for Indigo

I am aware of the background. However, I'm not certain that all the other PMC members are, so this summary is valuable. Thank you.

The modifications to the release document work for me.



On 05/31/2011 11:21 AM, Igor Vinnykov wrote:

Hi Wayne,


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.


The problem

We faced with licensing problem since initial project commit. Our project consists of two p art s: 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 p art of SVN project that has EPL compatible license (Apache license). But JavaHL includes licenses with GPL licenses (Neon library) that makes it EPL-incompatible.


Temporary solution

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 st art development on Eclipse and join Simultaneous releases. But legal issues with SVN connectors that are required p art of project, Subversive can't complete graduation and become a candidate for inclusion into standard distribution.


Approaches 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 resol ved . 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 resol ved .



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 ) to reflect the current situation and highlight potential problem solution after SVN 1.7 release.


Best regards,

Igor Vinnykov

Subversive Team


From: technology-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:technology -pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Wayne Beaton
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 12:21 AM
To: technology-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
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" option is a non-st art er.


On 05/30/2011 02:06 PM, Igor Vinnykov wrote:

Dear Technology PMC members,


We've prepared docuware for Indigo Simultaneous release. Please review it and let us know if it can be submitted to EMO.




Best regards,

Igor Vinnykov

Subversive Team


 technology-pmc mailing list   
_______________________________________________ technology-pmc mailing list technology-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx

Back to the top