Copyright infringement and future of Hunspell

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
12 messages Options
Németh László-2 Németh László-2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Copyright infringement and future of Hunspell

Hi,

A week ago you modified Hunspell’s license in the official Hunspell repository
without permission of the author, me, and the main contributor and maintainer,
Caolán McNamara.

==================================
commit d49170ce949dbe0d2e6ad74b6b876e5580704a5e
Author: Dimitrij Mijoski <[hidden email]>
Date:   Wed Nov 8 18:30:29 2017 +0100

    License everything under LGPLv3+. No more three licenses mumbo jumbo.

commit 6ff9a6fb5a63ee63294131eba7ce4e67624dffa5
Author: PanderMusubi <[hidden email]>
Date:   Wed Nov 8 16:45:35 2017 +0100

    improved copyright and authors
==================================

Free licenses and rich functionality helped Hunspell equally to
spread better multilingual spell checking among desktop and web
applications, so I don’t plan to replace the recent MPL/LGPL/GPL
tri-license with LGPL 3.

Moreover, it’s misleading to refer yourselves as the authors of Hunspell
(see your change in Hunspell’s AUTHORS file), when you are contributors
of the project.

If I right think, these modifications are related to your Mozilla funded Hunspell
development, in which, unfortunately, I wasn’t able to take part in it,
and I didn’t follow  your Mozilla application last year. I read about its success(?)
and your plan to create a spell checker from scratch only a few weeks ago.
(You have informed Caolán and me only about the first steps of the application,
if I right know.)

From its name and place in Hunspell repository, “Hunspell 2” is a
future replacement or successor of Hunspell library and command-line
executable, but it seems, it’s more like a fork of Hunspell development
efforts. According to your plan: “That aim for Hunspell 2.0 is to
recreate the most common functionality in Hunspell 1, and that is
detection and correction of spelling errors.”

Reimplementing a subset of the features and dropping dictionary formats
can result worse spell checking and dictionary incompatibilities between
applications (as I see in the case of Hungarian dictionary in your
project).

“Hunspell 2” won’t contain functions used by LibreOffice, main
target of Hunspell development. For example, every thesaurus uses Hunspell
for stemming, some of them also for morphological generation.

You promise the same spelling as in Hunspell, but you’ve already removed
all unit tests of Hunspell library to the dictionary “v1cmdline”.

Spell checking of LaTeX, HTML/XML and OpenDocument files will be also
“dropped” in your development, but this is a basic function of the
targeted academic publishing and automatized command-line document editing.

As the author of the half of Hunspell’s code base (the second half is
the work of Kevin Hendricks, author of MySpell), I don’t believe your
incomplete rewriting from scratch is a viable option with your limited
resources and experience (one C++ developer, insufficient knowledge
of the aim, usage and implementation of Hunspell features and
dictionaries).

[For example, you wrote the following about the LANG option of Hunspell
affix file in your analysis: “In the source code is no implementation
existing. Deprecate this option?”, while this option is really used
several places in language-specific parts of Hunspell. I have just added
support for special casing of Crimean Tatar language (extending the
Turkish and Azeri support – those were mentioned in Hunspell(5) manual
page), also adapted orthography changes in the special LANG_hu part of the
general compounding functions.]

See why trying to rewrite from scratch is a huge risk:
https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/04/06/things-you-should-never-do-part-i

Please, consider Caolán’s more than 700 Hunspell commits: excellent
and unique code-cleaning based on Red Hat, LibreOffice and Coverity bug
reports and – partly covering your aims – massive C++11 porting in
Hunspell library and command-line tool.

I think, the most important thing is to open Hunspell for more languages,
supporting research results of the academic sphere (see
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/dad3/5c719bb8bf5dffa8c757166fd1086be4d6c6.pdf,
http://voikko.puimula.org/architecture.html), improving recent
dictionaries and creating competitive linguistic features, especially for
LibreOffice.

I’m glad of that I can work on the Hungarian Hunspell dictionary these
months supported by FSF.hu Foundation, Hungary, fixing some minor
problems in Hunspell and LibreOffice, too. Moreover, last week I
adapted an interesting Hunspell feature to LibreOffice. I think, this
“Grammar By” improvement of the user dictionaries will be quite useful
for professional Writer users in several languages:
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/6.0#.E2.80.9CGrammar_By.E2.80.9D_spell_checking.

I would be glad of fixing the recent regression of the English thesauri
(morphological descriptions were removed by English dictionary update) in
LibreOffice, refining parts in Hunspell related to this and to the
“Grammar By” feature, giving frequency and pronunciation based
suggestions, avoiding overgeneration in compounding,
supporting agglutinative and other complex languages better, documenting
needs of the recent languages supported by LibreOffice and
adequacy
of the related Hunspell features, etc.

I am still uncertain, what are the priorities of large-scale Hunspell
developments, and what’s possible to develop, but I’m quite sure,
there is a better way to develop Hunspell, than relicensing and
rewriting it from scratch.

I would be glad if we could talk about it in libreoffice-dev list – and
later, also in libreoffice-l10n.

Best regards,
Laszlo


_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Димитриј Мијоски Димитриј Мијоски
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Copyright infringement and future of Hunspell

Hello Nemeth Laszlo,


I don't see any copyright infringement, as Hunspell allowed LGPLv2.1 or later, which safely allows us to put out derivative work to LGPLv3. And also, ALL copyright notices were kept.

You can answered much earlier, we created issues both about Mozilla funding and about relicensing months ago and NOBODY replied.

I can assure you, the library is in good hands. There will be FULL backward comparability with the dictionary format. Also, FULL backward compatibility with the library API will be kept. https://github.com/hunspell/hunspell/issues/543 As we develop new stuff, we will replace old stuff with new stuff incrementally. At some point I was thinking to make v2 with breaking changes but saw it is not a good path. Basically, if everything goes good, v2 spelling and suggestions will be done by new code, and stemming by the old code. We will rewrite our documents accordingly.


As for the license, I really don't see what is the problem with LGPLv3. It is a very open license which allows the library to be used pretty much everywhere, including application with more stricter licenses like GPL and proprietary licenses, and in more liberal licenses like BSD and MIT.


Again, the library is in good hands. If you want I can even show you my computer science degree with the grades.


From: Németh László <[hidden email]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2017 6:19:45 PM
To: Dimitrij Mijoski; PanderMusubi
Cc: libreoffice-dev
Subject: Copyright infringement and future of Hunspell
 
Hi,

A week ago you modified Hunspell’s license in the official Hunspell repository
without permission of the author, me, and the main contributor and maintainer,
Caolán McNamara.

==================================
commit d49170ce949dbe0d2e6ad74b6b876e5580704a5e
Author: Dimitrij Mijoski <[hidden email]>
Date:   Wed Nov 8 18:30:29 2017 +0100

    License everything under LGPLv3+. No more three licenses mumbo jumbo.

commit 6ff9a6fb5a63ee63294131eba7ce4e67624dffa5
Author: PanderMusubi <[hidden email]>
Date:   Wed Nov 8 16:45:35 2017 +0100

    improved copyright and authors
==================================

Free licenses and rich functionality helped Hunspell equally to
spread better multilingual spell checking among desktop and web
applications, so I don’t plan to replace the recent MPL/LGPL/GPL
tri-license with LGPL 3.

Moreover, it’s misleading to refer yourselves as the authors of Hunspell
(see your change in Hunspell’s AUTHORS file), when you are contributors
of the project.

If I right think, these modifications are related to your Mozilla funded Hunspell
development, in which, unfortunately, I wasn’t able to take part in it,
and I didn’t follow  your Mozilla application last year. I read about its success(?)
and your plan to create a spell checker from scratch only a few weeks ago.
(You have informed Caolán and me only about the first steps of the application,
if I right know.)

From its name and place in Hunspell repository, “Hunspell 2” is a
future replacement or successor of Hunspell library and command-line
executable, but it seems, it’s more like a fork of Hunspell development
efforts. According to your plan: “That aim for Hunspell 2.0 is to
recreate the most common functionality in Hunspell 1, and that is
detection and correction of spelling errors.”

Reimplementing a subset of the features and dropping dictionary formats
can result worse spell checking and dictionary incompatibilities between
applications (as I see in the case of Hungarian dictionary in your
project).

“Hunspell 2” won’t contain functions used by LibreOffice, main
target of Hunspell development. For example, every thesaurus uses Hunspell
for stemming, some of them also for morphological generation.

You promise the same spelling as in Hunspell, but you’ve already removed
all unit tests of Hunspell library to the dictionary “v1cmdline”.

Spell checking of LaTeX, HTML/XML and OpenDocument files will be also
“dropped” in your development, but this is a basic function of the
targeted academic publishing and automatized command-line document editing.

As the author of the half of Hunspell’s code base (the second half is
the work of Kevin Hendricks, author of MySpell), I don’t believe your
incomplete rewriting from scratch is a viable option with your limited
resources and experience (one C++ developer, insufficient knowledge
of the aim, usage and implementation of Hunspell features and
dictionaries).

[For example, you wrote the following about the LANG option of Hunspell
affix file in your analysis: “In the source code is no implementation
existing. Deprecate this option?”, while this option is really used
several places in language-specific parts of Hunspell. I have just added
support for special casing of Crimean Tatar language (extending the
Turkish and Azeri support – those were mentioned in Hunspell(5) manual
page), also adapted orthography changes in the special LANG_hu part of the
general compounding functions.]

See why trying to rewrite from scratch is a huge risk:
https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/04/06/things-you-should-never-do-part-i

Please, consider Caolán’s more than 700 Hunspell commits: excellent
and unique code-cleaning based on Red Hat, LibreOffice and Coverity bug
reports and – partly covering your aims – massive C++11 porting in
Hunspell library and command-line tool.

I think, the most important thing is to open Hunspell for more languages,
supporting research results of the academic sphere (see
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/dad3/5c719bb8bf5dffa8c757166fd1086be4d6c6.pdf,
http://voikko.puimula.org/architecture.html), improving recent
dictionaries and creating competitive linguistic features, especially for
LibreOffice.

I’m glad of that I can work on the Hungarian Hunspell dictionary these
months supported by FSF.hu Foundation, Hungary, fixing some minor
problems in Hunspell and LibreOffice, too. Moreover, last week I
adapted an interesting Hunspell feature to LibreOffice. I think, this
“Grammar By” improvement of the user dictionaries will be quite useful
for professional Writer users in several languages:
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/6.0#.E2.80.9CGrammar_By.E2.80.9D_spell_checking.

I would be glad of fixing the recent regression of the English thesauri
(morphological descriptions were removed by English dictionary update) in
LibreOffice, refining parts in Hunspell related to this and to the
“Grammar By” feature, giving frequency and pronunciation based
suggestions, avoiding overgeneration in compounding,
supporting agglutinative and other complex languages better, documenting
needs of the recent languages supported by LibreOffice and
adequacy
of the related Hunspell features, etc.

I am still uncertain, what are the priorities of large-scale Hunspell
developments, and what’s possible to develop, but I’m quite sure,
there is a better way to develop Hunspell, than relicensing and
rewriting it from scratch.

I would be glad if we could talk about it in libreoffice-dev list – and
later, also in libreoffice-l10n.

Best regards,
Laszlo


_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Pander Pander
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Copyright infringement and future of Hunspell

Dear László,


Thanks for your message and I understand you might be concerned. If you want, we can schedule an on-line meeting in order to discuss this further and hopefully find suitable answers for your questions. Me and Dimitrij regularly discuss the project on Jitsi. Would you like to join us one day and talk things through?


Best,


Pander


On 11/15/2017 07:03 PM, Димитриј Мијоски wrote:

Hello Nemeth Laszlo,


I don't see any copyright infringement, as Hunspell allowed LGPLv2.1 or later, which safely allows us to put out derivative work to LGPLv3. And also, ALL copyright notices were kept.

You can answered much earlier, we created issues both about Mozilla funding and about relicensing months ago and NOBODY replied.

I can assure you, the library is in good hands. There will be FULL backward comparability with the dictionary format. Also, FULL backward compatibility with the library API will be kept. https://github.com/hunspell/hunspell/issues/543 As we develop new stuff, we will replace old stuff with new stuff incrementally. At some point I was thinking to make v2 with breaking changes but saw it is not a good path. Basically, if everything goes good, v2 spelling and suggestions will be done by new code, and stemming by the old code. We will rewrite our documents accordingly.


As for the license, I really don't see what is the problem with LGPLv3. It is a very open license which allows the library to be used pretty much everywhere, including application with more stricter licenses like GPL and proprietary licenses, and in more liberal licenses like BSD and MIT.


Again, the library is in good hands. If you want I can even show you my computer science degree with the grades.


From: Németh László [hidden email]
Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2017 6:19:45 PM
To: Dimitrij Mijoski; PanderMusubi
Cc: libreoffice-dev
Subject: Copyright infringement and future of Hunspell
 
Hi,

A week ago you modified Hunspell’s license in the official Hunspell repository
without permission of the author, me, and the main contributor and maintainer,
Caolán McNamara.

==================================
commit d49170ce949dbe0d2e6ad74b6b876e5580704a5e
Author: Dimitrij Mijoski <[hidden email]>
Date:   Wed Nov 8 18:30:29 2017 +0100

    License everything under LGPLv3+. No more three licenses mumbo jumbo.

commit 6ff9a6fb5a63ee63294131eba7ce4e67624dffa5
Author: PanderMusubi <[hidden email]>
Date:   Wed Nov 8 16:45:35 2017 +0100

    improved copyright and authors
==================================

Free licenses and rich functionality helped Hunspell equally to
spread better multilingual spell checking among desktop and web
applications, so I don’t plan to replace the recent MPL/LGPL/GPL
tri-license with LGPL 3.

Moreover, it’s misleading to refer yourselves as the authors of Hunspell
(see your change in Hunspell’s AUTHORS file), when you are contributors
of the project.

If I right think, these modifications are related to your Mozilla funded Hunspell
development, in which, unfortunately, I wasn’t able to take part in it,
and I didn’t follow  your Mozilla application last year. I read about its success(?)
and your plan to create a spell checker from scratch only a few weeks ago.
(You have informed Caolán and me only about the first steps of the application,
if I right know.)

From its name and place in Hunspell repository, “Hunspell 2” is a
future replacement or successor of Hunspell library and command-line
executable, but it seems, it’s more like a fork of Hunspell development
efforts. According to your plan: “That aim for Hunspell 2.0 is to
recreate the most common functionality in Hunspell 1, and that is
detection and correction of spelling errors.”

Reimplementing a subset of the features and dropping dictionary formats
can result worse spell checking and dictionary incompatibilities between
applications (as I see in the case of Hungarian dictionary in your
project).

“Hunspell 2” won’t contain functions used by LibreOffice, main
target of Hunspell development. For example, every thesaurus uses Hunspell
for stemming, some of them also for morphological generation.

You promise the same spelling as in Hunspell, but you’ve already removed
all unit tests of Hunspell library to the dictionary “v1cmdline”.

Spell checking of LaTeX, HTML/XML and OpenDocument files will be also
“dropped” in your development, but this is a basic function of the
targeted academic publishing and automatized command-line document editing.

As the author of the half of Hunspell’s code base (the second half is
the work of Kevin Hendricks, author of MySpell), I don’t believe your
incomplete rewriting from scratch is a viable option with your limited
resources and experience (one C++ developer, insufficient knowledge
of the aim, usage and implementation of Hunspell features and
dictionaries).

[For example, you wrote the following about the LANG option of Hunspell
affix file in your analysis: “In the source code is no implementation
existing. Deprecate this option?”, while this option is really used
several places in language-specific parts of Hunspell. I have just added
support for special casing of Crimean Tatar language (extending the
Turkish and Azeri support – those were mentioned in Hunspell(5) manual
page), also adapted orthography changes in the special LANG_hu part of the
general compounding functions.]

See why trying to rewrite from scratch is a huge risk:
https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/04/06/things-you-should-never-do-part-i

Please, consider Caolán’s more than 700 Hunspell commits: excellent
and unique code-cleaning based on Red Hat, LibreOffice and Coverity bug
reports and – partly covering your aims – massive C++11 porting in
Hunspell library and command-line tool.

I think, the most important thing is to open Hunspell for more languages,
supporting research results of the academic sphere (see
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/dad3/5c719bb8bf5dffa8c757166fd1086be4d6c6.pdf,
http://voikko.puimula.org/architecture.html), improving recent
dictionaries and creating competitive linguistic features, especially for
LibreOffice.

I’m glad of that I can work on the Hungarian Hunspell dictionary these
months supported by FSF.hu Foundation, Hungary, fixing some minor
problems in Hunspell and LibreOffice, too. Moreover, last week I
adapted an interesting Hunspell feature to LibreOffice. I think, this
“Grammar By” improvement of the user dictionaries will be quite useful
for professional Writer users in several languages:
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/6.0#.E2.80.9CGrammar_By.E2.80.9D_spell_checking.

I would be glad of fixing the recent regression of the English thesauri
(morphological descriptions were removed by English dictionary update) in
LibreOffice, refining parts in Hunspell related to this and to the
“Grammar By” feature, giving frequency and pronunciation based
suggestions, avoiding overgeneration in compounding,
supporting agglutinative and other complex languages better, documenting
needs of the recent languages supported by LibreOffice and
adequacy
of the related Hunspell features, etc.

I am still uncertain, what are the priorities of large-scale Hunspell
developments, and what’s possible to develop, but I’m quite sure,
there is a better way to develop Hunspell, than relicensing and
rewriting it from scratch.

I would be glad if we could talk about it in libreoffice-dev list – and
later, also in libreoffice-l10n.

Best regards,
Laszlo



_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Rene Engelhard Rene Engelhard
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Copyright infringement and future of Hunspell

In reply to this post by Димитриј Мијоски
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 06:03:30PM +0000, Димитриј Мијоски wrote:
>    I don't see any copyright infringement, as Hunspell allowed LGPLv2.1 or
>    later, which safely allows us to put out derivative work to LGPLv3. And
>    also, ALL copyright notices were kept.

But you didn't ask the copyrigh holders.

>    As for the license, I really don't see what is the problem with LGPLv3. It
>    is a very open license which allows the library to be used pretty much
>    everywhere, including application with more stricter licenses like GPL and
>    proprietary licenses, and in more liberal licenses like BSD and MIT.

But not Apache, for example.

>    Again, the library is in good hands. If you want I can even show you my
>    computer science degree with the grades.

That does prove what?

Regards,

Rene
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Thorsten Behrens-6 Thorsten Behrens-6
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Copyright infringement and future of Hunspell

In reply to this post by Димитриј Мијоски
Hi guys,

Димитриј Мијоски wrote:
> I don't see any copyright infringement, as Hunspell allowed LGPLv2.1
> or later, which safely allows us to put out derivative work to
> LGPLv3. And also, ALL copyright notices were kept.
>
With LibreOffice being one of the major downstream consumers of
hunspell, we are concerned about this - so _if_ you're pondering to
reduce the number of licenses (which at any rate should be agreed on
amicably between the project maintainers), why not pick the MPL
instead?

Cheers,

-- Thorsten

_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

signature.asc (968 bytes) Download Attachment
Caolán McNamara Caolán McNamara
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Copyright infringement and future of Hunspell

In reply to this post by Димитриј Мијоски
On Wed, 2017-11-15 at 18:03 +0000, Димитриј Мијоски wrote:
> Hello Nemeth Laszlo,
>
> I don't see any copyright infringement, as Hunspell allowed LGPLv2.1
> or later, which safely allows us to put out derivative work to
> LGPLv3.

Sure, if you were forking hunspell to create something else and decided
to use that provision for the new work. But it's another thing to
modify the license of the preexisting hunspell over against the wishes
of the author.

I suggest a possible approach here. Currently hunspell has two main
dirs in it, src/hunspell for the classic code and src/hunspell2 for
your proposed successor with a shared toplevel dir with the license
statement, etc. While https://github.com/hunspell lists the current
hunspell related repositories of hunspell, myspell and mythes.

Why not add hunspell2 (or junspell) as a new work in a new repository
at that higher level, move src/hunspell2 from hunspell to the new repo
and copy whatever shared stuff is needed. Restore the old license stuff
for the classic hunspell repository and work away on the successor in
the separate repo under the hunspell umbrella.

> As for the license, I really don't see what is the problem with
> LGPLv3.

IANAL, but the existing consumers are known to work with the classic
license situation. Some of these consumers (e.g. the static linked and
unknowns of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunspell) may be unable or
unwilling (as a general policy) to use LGPLv2 vs the current
possibility of the MPL.
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Димитриј Мијоски Димитриј Мијоски
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Copyright infringement and future of Hunspell

In reply to this post by Rene Engelhard
Reverted.
https://github.com/hunspell/hunspell/commit/58dfe79637982c5c49658c57c3b01d4f44c07c19
I guess everybody should be happy now. Life goes on. I won't touch
version 1 code any more.

On 17.11.2017 15:21, Rene Engelhard wrote:
>
> But not Apache, for example.
>
Can you explain how is this? LGPL library can be linked dynamically to
any application with "incompatible" license (not sure if that was the
wording).


On 17.11.2017 16:23, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
> With LibreOffice being one of the major downstream consumers of
> hunspell, we are concerned about this - so_if_  you're pondering to
> reduce the number of licenses (which at any rate should be agreed on
> amicably between the project maintainers), why not pick the MPL
> instead?
I will see at later stages if LGPLv3/MPLv2 is a good option, for V2.


On 17.11.2017 16:54, Caolán McNamara wrote:
> Why not add hunspell2 (or junspell) as a new work in a new repository
> at that higher level, move src/hunspell2 from hunspell to the new repo
> and copy whatever shared stuff is needed. Restore the old license stuff
> for the classic hunspell repository and work away on the successor in
> the separate repo under the hunspell umbrella.
I will see later.
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Димитриј Мијоски Димитриј Мијоски
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Copyright infringement and future of Hunspell

On 17.11.2017 22:48, Wol's lists wrote:
> Except that LGPL2 at least contains bugs that result in
> unexpected/unwanted liabilities.
>
Maybe that's why it got updated to LGPL v3? I have not read v2, i know
only v3 and look fine to me.
> Some projects avoid (L)GPL on political grounds.
>
I personally don't understand this avoidance of GNU licenses. I do
understand that some people find GNU GPL a "strict" license. But then,
what should we say about proprietary EULAs of Microsoft? Isn't that
strict, yet still people use those products. Looking at those ends, LGPL
really is a liberal license. Whoever wanted to criticize it, please read
it. One should always remember that if it were not for GNU and it's
public licenses, FLOSS may not even exist.

---------------------

@ everyone in this thread

Ok, can we conclude now. V1 is tri-license back as it was, V2 will be
LGPLv3 only, for the time being. I did the change because I wanted to
link V2 into V1, to have full backward compatibility. But, I gave it an
additional though and there is a simple solution to link V1 into V2 and
keep the whole package backward compatible (including ABI).

Once V2 is finished, if you like it, put it in LibreOffice. If you don't
like it, don't do it. We are really trying hard to make a good product.

I apologize for any inconveniences I created.

Cheers,
Dimitrij.
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Димитриј Мијоски Димитриј Мијоски
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Copyright infringement and future of Hunspell

In reply to this post by Németh László-2
Hello Németh László,

hopefully you noticed that I fixed the issue you raised and reverted
things to where they were.

Considering all the input, would you be interested in updating the
license to MPL version 2. That license can be practically used as a
drop-in replacement of the tri-license and keep compatibility with all
users. Mozilla did exactly this for Firefox. Few years ago they were
using the the tri-license and they updated to MPLv2. Libreoffice already
uses MPLv2.

In the spirit of moving forward and modernizing, I think this change
will only simplify things for everyone. I will put version 2 under MPL 2
if we agree on this.

Best regards,
Dimitrij.
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Németh László-2 Németh László-2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Copyright infringement and future of Hunspell

In reply to this post by Димитриј Мијоски
Hi,

2017-11-17 19:44 GMT+01:00 Димитриј Мијоски <[hidden email]>:
> Reverted.
> https://github.com/hunspell/hunspell/commit/58dfe79637982c5c49658c57c3b01d4f44c07c19
> I guess everybody should be happy now. Life goes on. I won't touch
> version 1 code any more.

Thanks for reverting.

2017-11-18 1:00 GMT+01:00 Димитриј Мијоски <[hidden email]>:

@ everyone in this thread

Ok, can we conclude now. V1 is tri-license back as it was, V2 will be
LGPLv3 only, for the time being. I did the change because I wanted to
link V2 into V1, to have full backward compatibility. But, I gave it an
additional though and there is a simple solution to link V1 into V2 and
keep the whole package backward compatible (including ABI).

Once V2 is finished, if you like it, put it in LibreOffice. If you don't
like it, don't do it. We are really trying hard to make a good product.

This is not an option, because Hunspell development is part of LibreOffice.
Authors and main contributors are all LibreOffice (OpenOffice.org) developers.
Caolán and me used GitHub only as a git repository for Hunspell, fixing
Hunspell problems mostly reported by LibreOffice users.
Driving force and main target of Hunspell development is still LibreOffice.


I apologize for any inconveniences I created.

Thanks.

To solve this unfortunate situation, please, separate your "hunspell2" project
under a different gitHub project and name, without using "Hunspell" or
"Hunspell v2" titles for it.

This will help me a lot to continue Hunspell developments for LibreOffice
in the next few weeks and later.

Best regards,
Laszlo


Cheers,
Dimitrij.
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Димитриј Мијоски Димитриј Мијоски
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Copyright infringement and future of Hunspell

Really appreciate we resolved this. I have learned greatly. My mistake was really unintentional, I was not aware of possible consequences. Still would you be interested in making short video call to clear all doubts. We are available to do this right now.


On 21.11.2017 13:57, Németh László wrote:
Hi,

2017-11-17 19:44 GMT+01:00 Димитриј Мијоски <[hidden email]>:
> Reverted.
> https://github.com/hunspell/hunspell/commit/58dfe79637982c5c49658c57c3b01d4f44c07c19
> I guess everybody should be happy now. Life goes on. I won't touch
> version 1 code any more.

Thanks for reverting.

2017-11-18 1:00 GMT+01:00 Димитриј Мијоски <[hidden email]>:

@ everyone in this thread

Ok, can we conclude now. V1 is tri-license back as it was, V2 will be
LGPLv3 only, for the time being. I did the change because I wanted to
link V2 into V1, to have full backward compatibility. But, I gave it an
additional though and there is a simple solution to link V1 into V2 and
keep the whole package backward compatible (including ABI).

Once V2 is finished, if you like it, put it in LibreOffice. If you don't
like it, don't do it. We are really trying hard to make a good product.

This is not an option, because Hunspell development is part of LibreOffice.
Authors and main contributors are all LibreOffice (OpenOffice.org) developers.
Caolán and me used GitHub only as a git repository for Hunspell, fixing
Hunspell problems mostly reported by LibreOffice users.
Driving force and main target of Hunspell development is still LibreOffice.


I apologize for any inconveniences I created.

Thanks.

To solve this unfortunate situation, please, separate your "hunspell2" project
under a different gitHub project and name, without using "Hunspell" or
"Hunspell v2" titles for it.

This will help me a lot to continue Hunspell developments for LibreOffice
in the next few weeks and later.

Best regards,
Laszlo


Cheers,
Dimitrij.
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice



_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Caolán McNamara Caolán McNamara
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Copyright infringement and future of Hunspell

In reply to this post by Димитриј Мијоски
On Mon, 2017-11-20 at 18:04 +0000, Димитриј Мијоски wrote:
> Considering all the input, would you be interested in updating the
> license to MPL version 2.

Regardless of the final outcome here, moving to MPLv2 appeals to me, if
only for simplicity sake.
_______________________________________________
LibreOffice mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice