While this is all true, there is a key point in the policy that should be considered [1].
“Will the majority of users want to use my product without adding the optional components”? So if a Language Module is required and BerkeleyLM is so substandard that no one will really use it, then you aren’t really achieving what the policy is saying. Ralph [1] - http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#optional <http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#optional> > On Jun 20, 2015, at 8:42 PM, Niclas Hedhman <nic...@hedhman.org> wrote: > > As Ted is hinting, try to make a Joshua specific abstraction of the > Language Module, and then provide N implementations. The KenLM > implementation could be hosted outside ASF, in case Legal doesn't approve > (can't recall the status of that) of using KenLM's published API, and users > have to make the separate download of KenLM. > > Painful, yes somewhat... But I think you could provide a script that does > all the work, just make sure that the User is well-informed. > > Niclas > > On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 7:07 AM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Yes. That does sound like a blocker as it stands. >> >> Is there any prospect for relicensing? >> >> Is the BerkeleyLM package suitable for pulling into the Joshua project so >> that KenLM becomes an optional dependency? >> >> >> >> On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 3:50 PM, Lewis John Mcgibbney < >> lewis.mcgibb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Folks, >>> I am looking for some advice here. >>> We are currently in conversation about potentially transitioning the >> Joshua >>> project [0] to the foundation. Our current conversation is ongoing at >> [1]. >>> From one of the key developers of Joshua, the following question has >> arose; >>> There is an issue with an LGPL'd library for handling language models >>> (KenLM >>> <https://github.com/kpu/kenlm>). There is an alternative (BerkeleyLM), >> but >>> it is not actively maintained any more and is not quite as good as KenLM >> in >>> a few key respects. A quick glance at the incubator page suggests that >> this >>> dependency would keep the project from becoming a full-fledged one. Can >> you >>> comment on this? >>> Thanks for any input folks >>> Lewis >>> >>> [0] http://joshua-decoder.org/ >>> [1] https://github.com/joshua-decoder/joshua/issues/204 >>> >>> -- >>> *Lewis* >>> >> > > > > -- > Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer > http://zest.apache.org - New Energy for Java
