Agree, I've asked the question on that thread and will follow it up. I'd prefer not to pull these unless it's fairly clear it's going to be against policy.
On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 7:57 PM, Matei Zaharia <matei.zaha...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think you should ask legal about how to have some Maven artifacts for > these. Both Ganglia and Kinesis are very widely used, so it's weird to ask > users to build them from source. Maybe the Maven artifacts can be marked as > being under a different license? > > In the initial discussion for LEGAL-198, we were told the following: > > "If the component that uses this dependency is not required for the rest of > Spark to function then you can have a subproject to build the component. See > http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#optional. This means you will have > to provide instructions for users to enable the optional component (which IMO > should provide pointers to the licensing)." > > It's not clear whether "enable the optional component" means "every user must > build it from source", or whether we could tell users "here's a Maven > coordinate you can add to your project if you're okay with the licensing". > > Matei --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
