Forums : Feedback Forum
Dear Open Hub Users,
We’re excited to announce that we will be moving the Open Hub Forum to
https://community.blackduck.com/s/black-duck-open-hub.
Beginning immediately, users can head over,
register,
get technical help and discuss issue pertinent to the Open Hub. Registered users can also subscribe to Open Hub announcements here.
On May 1, 2020, we will be freezing https://www.openhub.net/forums and users will not be able to create new discussions. If you have any questions and concerns, please email us at
info@openhub.net
Version range needed for "New declared license"
Hi,
I just used the New declared License
button to add the LGPL and Apache V2 licenses to jboss logging's entry.
What I need to add is that versions before 3.1.2.GA are LGPL 2.1 licensed, and from 3.1.2 GA on, the license that applies is Apache V2.
Can you fix it?
Thanks,
Michael Hayes.
Michael,
We don't have a way to do that as a function. You would need to make that declaration in the Project Summary. You can maintain both licenses (historical and current) or only display the license of the current versions - your choice. It might be less confusing to only show the current license depending on how long ago the change took place.
Thanks!
Hi,
Thanks for the extremely prompt response.
I reckon you should think about it or at least for the cases where you can read the info. you need from the repos. This would be a valuable addition for your users.
More below if you're interested.
Michael Hayes.
As a user I have costs when it comes to evaluating and selecting 3PPs. Blackduck's ohloh/openhub site is useful to me in reducing those costs.
Selection of 3PP is dependent on having an acceptable license at least. (We will reject certain licenses out-of-hand.) For acceptable licenses, they still feed into the selection criteria - the beauty contest
between competing alternatives, where we have preference for licenses which are more favourable to us.
So, it is clear that license information is of value. At the moment, ohloh.net allows any randomer to show up and declare a new license. I have done this (accurately) for some projects where the information was not there already, but there appears to be no oversight - no verifying that the information submitted is correct. This means that the information is not trustworthy, and therefore not so valuable.
SO, you could provide valuable information if
1) From the repos, you could evaluate deterministically, where possible, which license applied.
2) Where this information cannot be read automatically, allow users (like me) to post the license applicable, maybe with a reference/url/justification indicating how the claim can be substantiated.
#Concrete examples of information that you could display.
Take Logback, for instance. As of release 0.9.18, logback source code and binaries are dual-licensed under the EPL v1.0 and the LGPL 2.1
Here's the url so you can check my submission: http://logback.qos.ch/license.html
Another example: javassist. Before version 3.15, the software was not available under the Apache V2 license. From 3.15, Apache V2 is available. Here's the url: https://github.com/jboss-javassist/javassist [this bit: This software is distributed under the Mozilla Public License Version 1.1, the GNU Lesser General Public License Version 2.1 or later, or the Apache License Version 2.0.
]
I bet other users are willing to submit and share information on licensing, and the ohloh/openhub site seems to me to be the best place to share that info...
Michael,
We do have technology to do this in other situations so it might be possible but it is by no means bullet-proof. All users are invited to help out with licensing except in cases where the managers of a project have designated it Managers Only
for editing. Also wonder how we would display the progression of the license over time. Probably would need a time-line somewhere to show the changes. Interesting.
Thanks!