[antlr-interest] Re: licensing stuff

lgcraymer lgc at mail1.jpl.nasa.gov
Fri Feb 6 11:42:52 PST 2004


Some quick comments:

1.)  ANTLR will be going Open Source soon, so in the long term there will be a solution.

2.)  For C# code generation--Addi's concern--there are a limited number of developers (and of people who contributed patches), the 
development is all recent (within 2 years), and one of the principal developers (Micheal Jor) is active in this group.  I doubt that it would 
take much time for Addi's lawyers to contact all contributors.

--Loring

--- In antlr-interest at yahoogroups.com, "Serge Bakkal" <serge.bakkal at w...> wrote:
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Ric Klaren" <klaren at c...>
> To: <antlr-interest at yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, February 06, 2004 11:23 AM
> Subject: Re: [antlr-interest] licensing stuff
> 
> 
> > On Thu, Feb 05, 2004 at 01:54:57PM -0800, Addi Jamshidi wrote:
> > > > From my understanding (and of course I maybe wrong), but I believe our
> > > > corporate lawyers have offered putting in place a licensing agreement
> that
> > > > is genuinely meant to be for Open Source (without charging anything
> from
> > > > the ANTLR community). Not sure what the outcome of it has been or
> whether
> > > > it has been accepted. But regardless, ANTLR does not need to hire
> lawyers,
> > > > all they need to do is to ask one of the comapnie's that is using (or
> > > > wanted to use) the ANTLR runtime library to provide them with the
> proper
> > > > licensing agreement and advice (after all it would be in the company's
> own
> > > > interest).
> > >
> > > FYI: Regretfully as it stands and as of today we have been told that the
> > > decision NOT to use ANTLR is final since the current licensing agreement
> > > leaves the corporation with potential law suits and liabilities in the
> > > future, and therefore we have to re-architect our product using other
> > > alternatives.
> >
> > You did see my suggestion of adding a custom codegenerator to antlr and an
> > own support lib ? As long as you don't have to ship the antlr tool itself
> > this looks a valid option to me.
> >
> > A manager would have to be seriously stupid not to consider that option
> > since retargetting a codegenerator for antlr is a lot less work than the 6
> > months work you guys spent in making your current parser. A small
> > calculation in costs will of course turn this in something even an
> > accountant can understand...
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Ric
> 
> Ok , As far as I can see , we here can use ANTLR quite safely for our
> internal needs ,
> but we will have to move to other tools if we plan to distribute our
> internal tools :
> Are other people coming to the same conclusion ? I came to Ric suggestion
> too .
> 
> Serge Bakkal



 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/antlr-interest/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
     antlr-interest-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
     http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



More information about the antlr-interest mailing list