View source

From APIDesign

You do not have permission to do that, for the following reason:
The action you have requested is limited to users in the group Bureaucrats.
You can view and copy the source of this page:
Wikipedia describes various types and examples of so called [[wikipedia::Direct action|direct action]]. This article talks about a legal struggle of the [[ApacheNetBeans]] project to get an approval to distribute [[GPLwithClassPathException]] licensed component and the [[DirectAction]] used to resolve it.

=== Animosity ===

The basic problem is the animosity between the [[Apache]] Foundation and the [[wikipedia::Free_Software_Foundation|Free Software Foundation]]. While the first builds software as on [[wikipedia::The_Cathedral_and_the_Bazaar|bazaar, the latter wants to build cathedrals]]. Each foundation has its own license and members of the [[Apache]] foundation start to see red whenever they find these three letters anywhere: [[GPL]]. That's not surprising - the virality of [[GPL]] (described in [[WhyGPL]] essay) completely contradicts the [[Apache]] bazaar-like aproach to software development.

=== [[GPLwithClassPathException]] isn't [[GPL]] ===

However [[GPLwithClassPathException]] isn't as viral as [[GPL]]. The [[GPLwithClassPathException|Classpath Exception]] allows redistribution of such binaries under any (including [[Apache]]) license. The problem is to get [[Apache]] legal to agree to it! Because once the true [[Apache]]rs see three [[GPL]] letters, they block and stop reading. As it is very hard to spell [[GPLwithClassPathException]] without spelling [[GPL]] prefix, it is really hard to convince a true [[Apache]]r to read [[GPLwithClassPathException]] fully!

Moreover while [[GPLwithClassPathException]] is quite common among [[Java]] projects, the roots of [[Apache]] foundation is its HTTP server written in [[C]]. ''Classpath'' has no meaning in the [[C]] language. People with mostly [[C]] skills are  going to recognize [[GPL]] in [[GPLwithClassPathException]] rather than the ''exception''!

Finally, with [https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-563 LEGAL-563] things moved forward.

=== [[DirectAction]]: Organize a Vote! ===

The continuous pressure in [https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-563 LEGAL-563] and elsewhere opened a possibility to take an action.

<blockquote>
''...it was accepted ... that ... [[GPLwithClassPathException]] binaries could be included in Apache convenience binaries...''
</blockquote>

That's from my perspective the major achievement that unlocked the rest. Reaching there took years, but the legal conclusion that [[Apache]] license and [[GPLwithClassPathException]] can be combined together really worth it.

<blockquote>
''...PMC should be fully capable of reading and understanding ...'' and
''...The crux of the issue seems to be resolved here and it seems that PMC will be following up separately...''
</blockquote>

Hearing from legal that the decision is fully in hands of ''Project Management Committee'' just called for a [[DirectAction]]. As ''PMC'' has only one decision process, a vote had to be organized! I am thankful that the [https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r1ddbb8f62ffb02a50db688c958dcd52e1dd3652974550bad9c24e95d%40%3Cdev.netbeans.apache.org%3E community decided in April 2021] that nb-[[javac]] is trusted to be [[GPLwithClassPathException]] licensed with '''4:2''' majority.

=== Requirement vs. Suggestion ===

Of course, [https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r1ddbb8f62ffb02a50db688c958dcd52e1dd3652974550bad9c24e95d%40%3Cdev.netbeans.apache.org%3E the vote] was not an unisimo vote. Some even tried to call the vote illegal and threaten the voters. True, it wasn't easy to find the four +1 votes. Do you know a programmer who'd vote about legal issues rather than do a bit of coding? Most of us wants to stay away from the legal stuff. However three brave members of the [[ApacheNetBeans]] ''Project Management Committee'' cast their votes, thank you guys! [[I]] added mine (while asking my [[OracleLabs]] co-workers to abstain to not pervert the vote) and that was it.

It wasn't surprising there were votes against. At the end certain legal suggestions like

<blockquote>
''... clear statement in LICENSE.txt that nb-javac is ... [[GPLwithClassPathException ]] in its entirety ...''
</blockquote>

were not fully implemented. However that is where the difference between ''requirement'' and ''suggestion'' comes into play in my opinion! ''Requirement'' has to be fulfilled, ''suggestion''s are just ''nice to have'' requests that don't have to be followed to the last letter. Understanding the difference between ''formal aspects'' and the ''spirit of the law'' is a necessity for organizing non-violent [[DirectAction]]s!

[[ApacheNetBeans]] PMC had full right to decide to trust the [[Oracle]] deeds regardless of ''nice to have formal'' suggestions not being implemented. The project could have spend years spinning around the ''formal aspects'' without moving forward. Stepping out from that vicious circle, taking [[DirectAction]] and calling for the vote unlocked the situation and allowed the [[ApacheNetBeans]] project to move forward and bundle [[GPLwithClassPathException]] licensed component.

=== Don't Seek for Permission ===

It is always easier to ask for a blessing than seek for a permission and this nb-[javac]] case confirms it. Organizing the [[DirectAction]] vote wasn't 100% guaranteed to succeed, but it was the most effective way to move forward. At the end the legal team confirmed my expectations:

<blockquote>
''...comment added to the README that is sufficient for our purposes. It does not have to be present in the released binary.''
</blockquote>

Of course, at the end it is all a matter of trust...

<blockquote>
''It's a sliding scale. Somewhere between a notarized grant signed by Ellison and someone whispering it to you in a bathroom, there exists a line between sufficient or not; we have no idea where that line may be until someone sues over it. It's okay when the PMC says it is okay, until it isn't, and we'll deal with that if someone from Oracle ever objects.''
</blockquote>

...and ''it is OK until it is not OK''!

== Summary ==

Thanks to the [[wikipedia:Direct_action|direct action]] - e.g. organizing the project management committee vote without a consent - we could successfully present an alternative which wasn't reachable by appealing the authorities. Once the ''PMC'' made it decision, it was easy for legal to agree to such decision as well.

It is possible for [[Apache]] projects to distribute [[GPLwithClassPathException]] components in their complementary binaries since 2021!
Return to DirectAction.
Retrieved from "http://wiki.apidesign.org/wiki/DirectAction"
View source

From APIDesign

Views

Personal tools

blogs & look

Navigation

Search

Toolbox

View source

From APIDesign

Views

Personal tools

blogs & look

Navigation

Search

Toolbox

buy
