879792 - Import stlport source

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Firefox Build System :: General, defect)

Description

[Mike Hommey [:glandium]]

As per bug 850576 comment 15 and this from irc:
 <ted> importing stlport into the tree seems fine

Comment 1

[Mike Hommey [:glandium]]

http://stlport.sourceforge.net/License.shtml
The "without fee" part makes my head ache. Gerv, what do you think? I know Debian doesn't like licenses that don't allow redistribution for a fee (think selling Debian DVDs), and I'm afraid what these licensing terms imply.

Comment 2

[Gervase Markham [:gerv]]

Hi Mike,

Thanks for asking - this is worth checking. I agree that the sentence is ambiguous - oh, that people would stick to standard licences! - but my reading is that the "without fee" bit means that we owe no fees to Boris Fomitchev, not that we are required to redistribute the software without fee (which would indeed be a restriction which is not open source compatible).

If this software becomes part of Firefox, we would need to update about:license. 

In any case, if it does not have one, please add a LICENSE file to the root of the stlport directory tree, containing the text from http://stlport.sourceforge.net/License.shtml . 

If we modify STLport, we need to add an additional sentence at the top of the LICENSE file:

The following is the license for STLport. This code has been modified by Mozilla.

(That's a requirement of the licence that we add a "this has been modified" notice.)

Gerv

Comment 3

[Mike Hommey [:glandium]]

(In reply to Gervase Markham [:gerv] from comment #2)
> Hi Mike,
> 
> Thanks for asking - this is worth checking. I agree that the sentence is
> ambiguous - oh, that people would stick to standard licences! - but my
> reading is that the "without fee" bit means that we owe no fees to Boris
> Fomitchev, not that we are required to redistribute the software without fee
> (which would indeed be a restriction which is not open source compatible).
> 
> If this software becomes part of Firefox, we would need to update
> about:license.

Actually, it is already part of Firefox. On Android, we used to link a static library that comes with the Android NDK and now build the sources from the NDK. On B2G, we are linking to a static library. So I guess we'd need to update about:license for both anyways.
In the end, we'd use the imported source in both cases, but the above would still need to be resolved for other branches if that is, as I suspect, a problem already.

Comment 4

[Gervase Markham [:gerv]]

OK. Can you stick the appropriate LICENSE file into the directory when we import it? Then please file a mozilla.org::Licensing bug about updating about:license.

Gerv

Comment 5

[Mike Hommey [:glandium]]

Attachment: Import the STLport source

This imports the STLport source as it is in NDK r8e, which is STLport 5.2.1 + a few Android specific patches.

Comment 6

[Mike Hommey [:glandium]]

Attachment: Import the STLport source

With an additional README.

Comment 7

[Mike Hommey [:glandium]]

Attachment: Import the STLport source

Without prebuilt libraries.

Comment 8

[(not currently active) Ted Mielczarek]

Comment on attachment 774404 [details] [diff] [review]
Import the STLport source

Review of attachment 774404 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

rs=me (I'm assuming there's no changes in here that need actual review.)

Comment 9

[Mike Hommey [:glandium]]

(In reply to Ted Mielczarek [:ted.mielczarek] from comment #8)
> rs=me (I'm assuming there's no changes in here that need actual review.)

The only file that's not in the NDK is README.mozilla.

Comment 10

[Mike Hommey [:glandium]]

https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/75ec39054b8a

Comment 11

[Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM]]

https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/75ec39054b8a