Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 20 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.
React license may be problematic #882
Comments
gstein
commented
Jul 17, 2017
|
Please note that the ASF chose this path for policy reasons, rather than "license incompatibility". We don't want downstream users of Apache code to be surprised by the PATENTS grant that (was) in RocksDB and (is) in React. Users should only need to follow the ALv2, with no further constraints. These license can work together (IMO) and simply provide two sets of restrictions upon users. |
dchest
referenced
this issue
in facebook/react
Jul 17, 2017
Open
Consider re-licensing to AL v2.0, as RocksDB has just done #10191
pmonks
commented
Jul 17, 2017
•
|
From the apache discussion: Roy T. Fielding added a comment - 12/Jun/17 13:50
(emphasis added) While it may be that the ASF believes this is a policy decision only, the same doesn't appear to apply to Facebook legal. EDIT: and yes, I realise this is reiterating the conversation in the React issue - in the spirit of the DRY Principle it may be better to continue it there. |
pmonks commentedJul 17, 2017
Just came across this React issue, as well as associated discussions within Apache legal, and wanted to alert the om team.
Note that after a quick search, I was unable to determine whether there's a similar compatibility concern between the EPL and Facebook BSD+Patents licenses as exists between ASLv2 and Facebook BSD+Patents. If not, this should be closed as a non-issue.