Dom4J: Which type of license?
|
Hello,
I keep stumbling on the Dom4J license categorization. Some people/groups label it as "BSD-style", while others argue this is an Apache-1.1 variation. The license terms: https://github.com/dom4j/dom4j/blob/master/LICENSE BSD-4-Clause: https://spdx.org/licenses/BSD-4-Clause Apache-1.1: https://spdx.org/licenses/Apache-1.1.html On one side would call this a BSD-5-Clause type of license, where a 5 clause type is yet unheard of. On the other hand it is closely related to Apache-1.1 text albeit the order of the clauses also changes slightly. At current time on our side this is just being categorized as "Open", meaning open source license terms without a specific family type. Albeit this is a sad situation since Dom4J seems in fact to be the licensing love child between BSD and Apache before they parted ways. Maybe we could do better. In case you see the question as fitting to the group, what would be your opinion on this topic? Many thanks, Max |
|
|
|
Alexios Zavras
I think you should look at "Plexus": https://spdx.org/licenses/Plexus.html
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
We even have a note that covers Dom4j 😊 -- zvr – -----Original Message-----
From: Spdx-legal@... <Spdx-legal@...> On Behalf Of Max Brito Sent: Wednesday, 6 February, 2019 13:35 To: Spdx-legal@... Subject: Dom4J: Which type of license? Hello, I keep stumbling on the Dom4J license categorization. Some people/groups label it as "BSD-style", while others argue this is an Apache-1.1 variation. The license terms: https://github.com/dom4j/dom4j/blob/master/LICENSE BSD-4-Clause: https://spdx.org/licenses/BSD-4-Clause Apache-1.1: https://spdx.org/licenses/Apache-1.1.html On one side would call this a BSD-5-Clause type of license, where a 5 clause type is yet unheard of. On the other hand it is closely related to Apache-1.1 text albeit the order of the clauses also changes slightly. At current time on our side this is just being categorized as "Open", meaning open source license terms without a specific family type. Albeit this is a sad situation since Dom4J seems in fact to be the licensing love child between BSD and Apache before they parted ways. Maybe we could do better. In case you see the question as fitting to the group, what would be your opinion on this topic? Many thanks, Max Intel Deutschland GmbH Registered Address: Am Campeon 10-12, 85579 Neubiberg, Germany Tel: +49 89 99 8853-0, www.intel.de Managing Directors: Christin Eisenschmid Chairperson of the Supervisory Board: Nicole Lau Registered Office: Munich Commercial Register: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 186928 |
|
|
|
Alan Tse
Not to unnecessarily self-promote, but this was the use case that made me write the SPDX-License-Diff chrome extension. https://github.com/spdx/spdx-license-diff. It also should work on Firefox (but currently only available compiled through the Chrome webstore using my personal dev account). https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/spdx-license-diff/kfoadicmilbgnicoldjmccpaicejacdh. Once SPDX gets an official dev account for posting, I'll post it on Firefox too.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Alan -----Original Message-----
From: Spdx-legal@... [mailto:Spdx-legal@...] On Behalf Of Alexios Zavras Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2019 6:20 AM To: Max Brito <brito@...> Cc: Spdx-legal@... Subject: Re: Dom4J: Which type of license? I think you should look at "Plexus": https://spdx.org/licenses/Plexus.html We even have a note that covers Dom4j 😊 -- zvr – -----Original Message----- From: Spdx-legal@... <Spdx-legal@...> On Behalf Of Max Brito Sent: Wednesday, 6 February, 2019 13:35 To: Spdx-legal@... Subject: Dom4J: Which type of license? Hello, I keep stumbling on the Dom4J license categorization. Some people/groups label it as "BSD-style", while others argue this is an Apache-1.1 variation. The license terms: https://github.com/dom4j/dom4j/blob/master/LICENSE BSD-4-Clause: https://spdx.org/licenses/BSD-4-Clause Apache-1.1: https://spdx.org/licenses/Apache-1.1.html On one side would call this a BSD-5-Clause type of license, where a 5 clause type is yet unheard of. On the other hand it is closely related to Apache-1.1 text albeit the order of the clauses also changes slightly. At current time on our side this is just being categorized as "Open", meaning open source license terms without a specific family type. Albeit this is a sad situation since Dom4J seems in fact to be the licensing love child between BSD and Apache before they parted ways. Maybe we could do better. In case you see the question as fitting to the group, what would be your opinion on this topic? Many thanks, Max Intel Deutschland GmbH Registered Address: Am Campeon 10-12, 85579 Neubiberg, Germany Tel: +49 89 99 8853-0, www.intel.de Managing Directors: Christin Eisenschmid Chairperson of the Supervisory Board: Nicole Lau Registered Office: Munich Commercial Register: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 186928 |
|
|
|
Thanks you both!
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
We adopted the Plexus name as category. Problem solved. Kind regards, Max -------- Original Message -------- On 6/02/2019, 19:49, Alan Tse < Alan.Tse@...> wrote:
|
|
|