Re: ASL 2.0 based software contribution to FreeBSD code base

On Wed, 11 Mar 2009, Chuck Swiger wrote:

> On Mar 11, 2009, at 6:43 AM, Saifi Khan wrote:
> >Is Apache Software License (ASL) 2.0 based software contributions accepted in
> >FreeBSD code base ?
> 
> There is a strong preference for the "Simplified" or 2-clause BSD license.
> The ASL2 more closely resembles the old or 4-clause BSD license including the
> "advertising clause".  There does not appear to be any code under the ASL2 in
> FreeBSD at present, although OpenSSL is dual-licensed and part of it resembles
> the ASL2.
> 
> >Specific case to consider would be:
> >a. device driver code released under ASL 2.0
> >
> >b. code contributed to kernel (eg. scheduler implementation)
> >   under ASL 2.0
> >
> >c. code contributed to userland (eg. new implementation of
> >  ctags) under ASL 2.0
> >
> >Can some of the experienced members share how things work within the context
> >of FreeBSD project ?
> 
> Likely that some of these cases (ie, c) would handled by having the software
> be in the ports tree rather than in the FreeBSD base code itself, but the
> decision would be up to FreeBSD's core team....
> 
> Regards,
> -- 
> -Chuck
> 

ASL 2.0 has a fairly precise mechanism for dealing with patent
litigation. When a recipient asserts a patent on a ASL2.0
licensed software, it violates the terms of the license and all
its rights are terminated without any remedy. The BSD license is
silent/vague on this.

ASL 2.0 is not the old 4-clause BSD license with escalating
advertising requirements.

Your mail seems to suggest that stuff under ASL 2.0 needs to go
under the ports. Would that be for the drivers as well ?

Is there anything specified in the FreeBSD project, that would
prohibit ASL 2.0 licensed device drivers from being used in 
the OS ?


thanks
Saifi.