OCCT becomes LGPL

[D. Barbier]

Hello,

A quick message sent from my phone, Mikhail Kazakov from OpenCascade SAS just announced at the Salome User's Day that next OCCT version will be LGPL!
Thanks OpenCascade, this is really exciting, I am pretty sure that this will be beneficial to OCCT too.
More details when I find a real keyboard, but I wanted to share this long awaited information ASAP.

Enjoy,
Denis

[Thomas Paviot]

2013/11/21 D. Barbier <bou...@gmail.com>

Hi Denis,

Thanks for this great news, which will definitely change the way contributors work with the OpenCascade company.

Thomas

 

[jelle feringa]

Thanks OpenCascade, this is really exciting, I am pretty sure that this will be beneficial to OCCT too.

Wonderful!

A salutation to both OCC and OCE - I think its fair to assume that OCE's efforts have contributed in that wise decision!

Beautiful.

-jelle

[QbProg]

Wow! Nice news!

[Epy]

So, will we be able to LGPL OCE as well then? OCE was originally derived from older OCCTPL versions of OCCT, and all the work to this date has been done under OCCTPL, yes?

[D. Barbier]

On 2013/11/21 Epy wrote:
> So, will we be able to LGPL OCE as well then? OCE was originally derived
> from older OCCTPL versions of OCCT, and all the work to this date has been
> done under OCCTPL, yes?

Hello,

Yes, you are fully right, thanks for raising this issue.
I am pretty confident that we will be able to relicense OCE to LGPL as
well. We have to ask people who contributed significant changes their
permission to relicense their code. Since we have email addresses of
all commit authors, the easiest solution is to send an email to all
authors. After some time (one month?), for each contributor who
refused to grant permission to relicense their code, or did not reply,
we carefully review the changes made by this author. If they are
trivial, there is no problem, we can relicense their code. Otherwise,
we will have to reimplement those changes.
See for instance
http://www-archive.mozilla.org/MPL/relicensing-faq.html
how Mozilla did their relicensing.

I will send those mails after OCC officially announce their license change.

Denis

[István Csanády]

That's great, however it also means, that we won't be able to use OpenCASCADE in the iOS App Store, because it is incompatible with it. Is there going to be a dual licensing model? Or only LGPL?

[István Csanády]

I take back my previous post, there is a long discussion about LGPL and the App Store here : http://stackoverflow.com/questions/459833/which-open-source-licenses-are-compatible-with-the-apples-iphone-and-its-offici

It seems, that it is not clear if LGPL libraries are allowed to use in the App Store or not. Eg. developers of ffmpeg are not considering it as a violation of the LGPL, but some others do.

On Thursday, November 21, 2013 11:01:33 AM UTC+1, Denis Barbier wrote:

[Daniel Brunier-Coulin (OPEN CASCADE)]

Thanks to all of you for your feed-backs.

Another point:
We see that OCE project experiences difficulty in storing binary archives, and they are relocated regularly. We can probably help by providing disk space on our server where OCE binaries can be safely stored for a longer term. By the moment, we can propose 10 Gb of space, with password-protected FTP access  for upload, and anonymous HTTP access for download, at dev.opencascade.org. Naturally terms of use of the web site shall apply.

Is that okay ?

[Daniel Brunier-Coulin (OPEN CASCADE)]

Currently we intend to use LPGL v2.1 only.

[Daniel Brunier-Coulin (OPEN CASCADE)]

Sorry for my typo, I meant LGPL v2.1

[Thomas Paviot]

2013/11/22 Daniel Brunier-Coulin (OPEN CASCADE) <daniel.bru...@opencascade.com>

Hi Daniel,

Thank you very much however for your offer, but hosting OCE binaries is actually not really an issue. There are many ways today to benefit from excellent online storage. Qb setup a google drive (https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B_ViHoVYlC2JRld2bEhwbkFyTmM&usp=sharing) that will host future releases of oce, which it's much more convenient that an ftp server.

However, I see a point where OCC could be helpful: continuous integration. We already discussed here this topic, and online free CI servers are restricted to small sized projects. We could imagine that OCC set up a Travis CI (for instance) server, shared with OCE. Just think about it!

Best Regards,

Thomas

[D. Barbier]

On 2013/11/29 Thomas Paviot wrote:
> 2013/11/22 Daniel Brunier-Coulin (OPEN CASCADE)

> wrote:
>
>> Thanks to all of you for your feed-backs.
>>
>> Another point:
>> We see that OCE project experiences difficulty in storing binary archives,
>> and they are relocated regularly. We can probably help by providing disk
>> space on our server where OCE binaries can be safely stored for a longer
>> term. By the moment, we can propose 10 Gb of space, with password-protected
>> FTP access for upload, and anonymous HTTP access for download, at
>> dev.opencascade.org. Naturally terms of use of the web site shall apply.
>>
>> Is that okay ?
>
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Thank you very much however for your offer, but hosting OCE binaries is
> actually not really an issue. There are many ways today to benefit from
> excellent online storage. Qb setup a google drive
> (https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B_ViHoVYlC2JRld2bEhwbkFyTmM&usp=sharing)
> that will host future releases of oce, which it's much more convenient that
> an ftp server.

[...]

Hello Thomas,

I agree with the 2nd part of your mail (removed above), but not with
this one. Daniel mentioned ftp only for uploads, downloads are
performed via http. It sounds interesting to me. I am pretty sure
that some corporate proxies forbid access to google drive, we could
upload binaries to both sites.

Denis

[QbProg]

I agree in hosting the binaries at dev.opencascade.org . And also the google drive space has an hugly url!

Qb