Thanks Sarah and Kevin for finding a solution! Excited to see the work
move forward.

Ian

On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 1:58 PM Jacob Wujciak-Jens
<ja...@voltrondata.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> That's great news, thank you both for your efforts!
>
> Best,
> Jacob
>
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 6:45 PM Sarah Gilmore
> <sgilm...@mathworks.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Hi Everyone,
> >
> >
> >
> > We just wanted to close the loop on this discussion.
> >
> >
> >
> > After further discussion with our colleagues at MathWorks, we determined
> > that we can license the MEX binaries and ALL other contents included within
> > the MLTBX files distrusted via the ASF release infrastructure under the
> > standard Apache V2 license.
> >
> >
> >
> > ASF Legal agreed [1] that this approach abides by the ASF 3rd Party
> > License Policy [2].
> >
> >
> >
> > Moving forward, Kevin and I will continue working on integrating with the
> > Arrow project's release infrastructure [3] as we initially planned.
> >
> >
> >
> > We sincerely appreciate everyone's patience as we navigated these
> > challenges.
> >
> >
> >
> > [1]
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-665?focusedCommentId=17823330&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-17823330
> > [2] https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html
> > [3] https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/38660
> >
> >
> >
> > Best,
> >
> >
> >
> > Sarah and Kevin
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Sarah Gilmore <sgilm...@mathworks.com.INVALID>
> > Sent: Friday, January 26, 2024 1:28 PM
> > To: dev@arrow.apache.org <dev@arrow.apache.org>
> > Cc: Kevin Gurney <kgur...@mathworks.com>
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS][MATLAB] Proposed "Category B" License for Bundling
> > MATLAB MEX Build Artifacts in Official Arrow Release
> >
> > Hi Ian,
> >
> > Thanks for the feedback! We will proceed with the ASF Legal process. Once
> > we hear back from them, we'll followup on this thread to close the loop.
> >
> > Thanks again!
> >
> > Sarah and Kevin
> >
> >
> > From: Ian Cook <ianmc...@apache.org>
> > Sent: Friday, January 26, 2024 11:37 AM
> > To: dev@arrow.apache.org <dev@arrow.apache.org>
> > Cc: Kevin Gurney <kgur...@mathworks.com>
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS][MATLAB] Proposed "Category B" License for Bundling
> > MATLAB MEX Build Artifacts in Official Arrow Release
> >
> > Hi Sarah and Kevin,
> >
> > Thanks for your thoughtful follow-up.
> >
> > Based on all of this, it seems that this question will need to be
> > submitted to ASF Legal for consideration. I think it is quite clear
> > that this is a good-faith effort to abide by the spirit of the ASF 3rd
> > Party License Policy, but the specific details will need to be
> > considered by ASF Legal.
> >
> > > The binaries we plan to submit, and the accompanying license,
> > > are similar to the use cases listed under “Handling Licenses That
> > > Prevent Modification” [3] in the Category B description. While most
> > > of the contents of the distributed MLTBX file would be Apache-
> > > licensed, the compiled MEX functions would be dynamically linked
> > > against proprietary MathWorks shared libraries, which would cause
> > > inclusion of non-Apache licensed object code.
> >
> > Yes, I think that is the right approach to pursue with ASF Legal:
> > asking them to add the license that governs the MEX functions to the
> > list of approved licenses under [3].
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ian
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 10:56 AM Sarah Gilmore
> > <sgilm...@mathworks.com.invalid> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > After consulting with some of our colleagues at MathWorks, we wanted to
> > follow-up on this thread.
> > >
> > > Before going through the official ASF legal process, we wanted to give
> > the community some insight into our thinking about why our proposed license
> > may be appropriate for Category B consideration.
> > >
> > > Our interpretation of the ASF 3rd Party License Policy [1] was that
> > Category B licenses are not limited to standard licenses, but, rather, must
> > meet the Appropriately Labelled Condition and the Binary-Only Inclusion
> > Condition. The proposed license [2] we shared is intended to meet these
> > conditions. However, we understand that our interpretation may not be
> > accurate.
> > >
> > > The binaries we plan to submit, and the accompanying license, are
> > similar to the use cases listed under “Handling Licenses That Prevent
> > Modification” [3] in the Category B description. While most of the contents
> > of the distributed MLTBX file would be Apache-licensed, the compiled MEX
> > functions would be dynamically linked against proprietary MathWorks shared
> > libraries, which would cause inclusion of non-Apache licensed object code.
> > >
> > > The goal of the proposed license is to allow the MLTBX file to be used
> > and distributed freely as an official ASF release artifact. Ideally,
> > MathWorks would like to restrict reverse engineering and modification of
> > the proprietary components and the proposed license includes a clause for
> > this restriction. Since the MATLAB Interface to Arrow will likely only be
> > useful to users of MathWorks products, our hope is that this restriction
> > would not be an impediment to users.
> > >
> > > We understand this is an unusual situation and appreciate the
> > community's support in helping us identify a solution.
> > >
> > > [1] https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html<
> > https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html>
> > > [2] https://github.com/apache/arrow/files/13955180/license.txt<
> > https://github.com/apache/arrow/files/13955180/license.txt>
> > > [3] https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#no-modification<
> > https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#no-modification>
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > >
> > > Sarah and Kevin
> > >
> > >
> > > From: Sarah Gilmore <sgilm...@mathworks.com>
> > > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2024 1:58 PM
> > > To: dev@arrow.apache.org <dev@arrow.apache.org>
> > > Cc: Kevin Gurney <kgur...@mathworks.com>
> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS][MATLAB] Proposed "Category B" License for
> > Bundling MATLAB MEX Build Artifacts in Official Arrow Release
> > >
> > > Hi Roman,
> > >
> > > > FWIW: while these are all excellent questions for the pre-work, if
> > there
> > > > needs to be an ultimate statement on this -- you'll have to file a
> > LEGAL
> > > > JIRA. E.g.: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-506<
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-506>
> > > >
> > > > (plz include all the relevant details when filing it -- whatever comes
> > > > out of this thread).
> > >
> > > Thank you for the guidance. We suspected this may be the case and will
> > be sure to include all the relevant information when we file the Jira issue.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > Sarah and Kevin
> > >
> > > From: Roman Shaposhnik <r...@apache.org>
> > > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2024 12:15 PM
> > > To: dev@arrow.apache.org <dev@arrow.apache.org>
> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS][MATLAB] Proposed "Category B" License for
> > Bundling MATLAB MEX Build Artifacts in Official Arrow Release
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 12:24 PM Ian Cook <ianmc...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Sarah,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for pursuing this.
> > > >
> > > > The ASF 3rd Party License Policy lists a number of standard,
> > > > off-the-shelf licenses that are compatible with Category B, but the
> > > > policy does not include any provision for custom-written licenses.
> > > > This appears to be a custom-written license. Is that correct?
> > > >
> > > > Is this custom-written license based on one of the listed Category B
> > > > licenses? If so, can you tell us which one? If not, can you provide
> > > > some explanation of why this license should be considered to meet the
> > > > criteria for Category B?
> > >
> > > FWIW: while these are all excellent questions for the pre-work, if there
> > > needs to be an ultimate statement on this -- you'll have to file a LEGAL
> > > JIRA. E.g.: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-506<
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-506>
> > >
> > > (plz include all the relevant details when filing it -- whatever comes
> > > out of this thread).
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Roman.
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Thank you,
> > > > Ian
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 12:08 PM Sarah Gilmore
> > > > <sgilm...@mathworks.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Everyone,
> > > > >
> > > > > Kevin Gurney and I have been working on integrating the MATLAB Arrow
> > bindings with the project's release processes in this pull request [1].
> > While working on integrating with the release tooling, we realized that we
> > need to ensure that the licenses of any MEX artifacts [2] bundled with the
> > released MLTBX [3] file are compatible with the ASF 3rd Party License
> > Policy [4].
> > > > >
> > > > > After several rounds of discussion with some colleagues at
> > MathWorks, we came up with a license [5] that is intended to meet the
> > requirements for inclusion as a "Category B" [6] license according to the
> > ASF 3rd Party License Policy.
> > > > >
> > > > > Our goal is to make sure we are doing the right thing here, so, as
> > per Kou's suggestion [7], we wanted to share the proposed license [5] with
> > the broader Arrow development community. We understand this may need
> > further input from ASF Legal as well.
> > > > >
> > > > > Please let us know what we can do to help move this forward. We
> > sincerely appreciate everyone's support as we navigate these licensing
> > requirements.
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/38660<
> > https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/38660>
> > > > > [2] https://www.mathworks.com/help/matlab/call-mex-functions.html
> > > > > [3]
> > https://www.mathworks.com/help/matlab/creating-help.html?s_tid=CRUX_lftnav
> > > > > [4] https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html<
> > https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html>
> > > > > [5] https://github.com/apache/arrow/files/13955180/license.txt<
> > https://github.com/apache/arrow/files/13955180/license.txt>
> > > > > [6] https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b<
> > https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b>
> > > > > [7]
> > https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/38660#discussion_r1454804607<
> > https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/38660#discussion_r1454804607>
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > >
> > > > > Sarah Gilmore
> > > > >
> >

Reply via email to