Forums : Ohloh General Discussion
Dear Open Hub Users,
We’re excited to announce that we will be moving the Open Hub Forum to
https://community.synopsys.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
[email protected]
Apache Software License may conflict with GPL
Hi:
For my project, DrJava ( http://www.ohloh.net/projects/drjava ), Ohloh reports
Apache Software License may conflict with GPL
Unfortunately, there's no way to find out which files were reported to have the Apache Software License, and which use GPL.
One thing that we are wondering, now that we are evaluating our project, is whether Ohloh considers just the most current version (the trunk) of the repository when making the judgement about the licenses used, or whether legacy files somewhere in the repository count as well.
Can someone please shed some light on that?
Thanks!
Hi mgricken,
Yes, the website doesn't give the filenames, which is rather annoying. I did a database query and came up with the following:
misc/plt-ant/src/edu/rice/cs/plt/ant/ForNumTask.java
misc/plt-ant/src/edu/rice/cs/plt/ant/OneLineJUnitResultFormatter.java
misc/plt-ant/src/edu/rice/cs/plt/ant/QuietJUnitResultFormatter.java
When I manually spot-checked these files, I found that they contained Apache 2.0, while our code parser returns a result of Apache 1.0. The version mismatch here may be a bug in our parser.
We consider only the most recent version of the code when presenting the license information. We do track the license changes over time, so someday we might implement an analysis of license usage over time, or even which developers add or remove licenses. However, for now, we only present the latest snapshot.
Robin
Thanks, that helps a lot!
BTW I confirmed that the Apache 1.0 vs Apache 2.0 error was a bug in our code, and am deploying the fix now.
I'll schedule a recount for DrJava, which should correct the license version in our report.