[EVALUATION] - E03 - License Status of IDEA Runtime Libs

within the installation readme, i've detected this comment:

"
redist/ Contains two libraries:
forms_rt.jar should be distributed with your applications that use GUI forms produced in IDEA;
javac2.jar is necessary for building applications with IDEA's GUI forms
"

which is the license of those 2 libraries?

are there any other libraries that are neccessary to run applications developed with IDEA?

-

Requirement:

All runtime libraries should be available with an OSI compliant license.

-

Does JetBrains IntelliJ IDEA fulfill this requirement?

If not, which are the limitations?

-



.

--
http://lazaridis.com

24 comments

Search the list, you soon will find the answer.

Tom

0

In license/IDEA_license.txt:


4. LICENSE TO DISTRIBUTE REDISTRIBUTABLE

In addition to the license granted in Section 3 of this Agreement, JetBrains
grants you a non-exclusive, limited license to reproduce and distribute those
files located in the "redist" folder in the Software installation provided
that:

you agree to defend and indemnify JetBrains and its licensors from
and against any damages, costs, liabilities, settlement amounts and/or expenses
(including attorneys' fees) incurred in connection with any claim, lawsuit
or action by any third party that arises or results from the use or distribution
of any and all redistributable files.



0

Carlos Costa e Silva wrote:

Ilias Lazaridis wrote:

>> within the installation readme, i've detected this comment:
>>
>> " redist/ Contains two libraries: forms_rt.jar should
>> be distributed with your applications that use GUI forms produced
>> in IDEA; javac2.jar is necessary for building applications with
>> IDEA's GUI forms "
>>
>> which is the license of those 2 libraries?

In license/IDEA_license.txt:


4. LICENSE TO DISTRIBUTE REDISTRIBUTABLE

In addition to the license granted in Section 3 of this Agreement,
JetBrains grants you a non-exclusive, limited license to reproduce
and distribute those files located in the "redist" folder in the
Software installation provided that:

you agree to defend and indemnify JetBrains and its licensors
from and against any damages, costs, liabilities, settlement amounts
and/or expenses (including attorneys' fees) incurred in connection
with any claim, lawsuit or action by any third party that arises or
results from the use or distribution of any and all redistributable
files.


>> are there any other libraries that are neccessary to run
>> applications developed with IDEA?

?

>> Requirement:
>>
>> All runtime libraries should be available with an OSI compliant
>> license.
>>
>> Does JetBrains IntelliJ IDEA fulfill this requirement?

no

>> If not, which are the limitations?

several .

>> [sidenote: even JVM open source implementations are already
>> available. It would be a major point against IDEA, if it requires
>> proprietary closed source libraries to run applications.]

Is JetBrains willing/entitled to change the licensing status of the
runtime, thus enabling a full open-source runtime?

.

--
http://lazaridis.com

0

Ilias Lazaridis wrote:

Carlos Costa e Silva wrote:

>> Ilias Lazaridis wrote:

>>> " redist/ Contains two libraries: forms_rt.jar should
>>> be distributed with your applications that use GUI forms produced
>>> in IDEA; javac2.jar is necessary for building applications with
>>> IDEA's GUI forms "

>>> are there any other libraries that are neccessary to run
>>> applications developed with IDEA?


?


Can I please have an answer on this?


>>> [sidenote: even JVM open source implementations are already
>>> available. It would be a major point against IDEA, if it requires
>>> proprietary closed source libraries to run applications.]


Is JetBrains willing/entitled to change the licensing status of the
runtime, thus enabling a full open-source runtime?


Any official answer on this?

.

--
http://lazaridis.com

0

Source code for those libraries are avaliable for download in Plugin Development
Package (checkout IDEA download page).
License terms for the stuff avaliable in IDEA_license.txt, paragraph 4.

Ilias Lazaridis wrote:

>> Carlos Costa e Silva wrote:
>>
>>> Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
>>>


>>>> " redist/ Contains two libraries: forms_rt.jar should
>>>> be distributed with your applications that use GUI forms produced
>>>> in IDEA; javac2.jar is necessary for building applications with
>>>> IDEA's GUI forms "
>>>>


>>>> are there any other libraries that are neccessary to run
>>>> applications developed with IDEA?
>>>>
>> ?
>>

Can I please have an answer on this?


>>>> [sidenote: even JVM open source implementations are already
>>>> available. It would be a major point against IDEA, if it requires
>>>> proprietary closed source libraries to run applications.]
>>>>
>> Is JetBrains willing/entitled to change the licensing status of the
>> runtime, thus enabling a full open-source runtime?
>>

Any official answer on this?

..



0

Maxim Shafirov wrote:
>> Ilias Lazaridis wrote:

>>>>> " redist/ Contains two libraries: forms_rt.jar

>>>>> are there any other libraries that are neccessary to run
>>>>> applications developed with IDEA?


>>> Is JetBrains willing/entitled to change the licensing status of
>>> the runtime, thus enabling a full open-source runtime?


>> Any official answer on this?


Source code for those libraries are avaliable for download in Plugin
Development Package (checkout IDEA download page). License terms for
the stuff avaliable in IDEA_license.txt, paragraph 4.


thank you for the info, but this does not answer the 2 open questions.

.

--
http://lazaridis.com

0

Ilias Lazaridis wrote:

Maxim Shafirov wrote:

>>> Ilias Lazaridis wrote:

>>>>>> " redist/ Contains two libraries: forms_rt.jar

>>>>>> are there any other libraries that are neccessary to run
>>>>>> applications developed with IDEA?

>>>> Is JetBrains willing/entitled to change the licensing status of
>>>> the runtime, thus enabling a full open-source runtime?

>>> Any official answer on this?
>>
>> Source code for those libraries are avaliable for download in Plugin
>> Development Package (checkout IDEA download page). License terms for
>> the stuff avaliable in IDEA_license.txt, paragraph 4.


thank you for the info, but this does not answer the 2 open questions.


can I please have an answer on the above 2 questions?

.

--
http://lazaridis.com

0

Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> " redist/ Contains two libraries: forms_rt.jar
>>
>>>>>>> are there any other libraries that are neccessary to run
>>>>>>> applications developed with IDEA?
>>
>>
>>>>> Is JetBrains willing/entitled to change the licensing status of
>>>>> the runtime, thus enabling a full open-source runtime?
>>
>>
>>>> Any official answer on this?

can I please have an answer on the above 2 questions?


Please!



.

--
http://lazaridis.com

0

Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
>>>>>>>> are there any other libraries that are neccessary to run
>>>>>>>> applications developed with IDEA?

[note to readers: quoted answers received via email.

"1. forms_rt.jar is the only library necessary to run GUI applications
created in IDEA. If you are not using GUI designer, no libraries are
necessary."

>>>>>> Is JetBrains willing/entitled to change the licensing status of
>>>>>> the runtime, thus enabling a full open-source runtime?
>>>

"2. It's possible, but we don't see reasons to do it at the moment."

I've stated the reason in the original message:

To fulfill such an requirement of customers.

"
Requirement:

All runtime libraries should be available with an OSI compliant license.
"

Can I expect this change in the near future?

[note to support@jetbrains.com: if you are CC'd from a public
conversation, your answer is expected publically]

.

--
http://lazaridis.com

0

Can I expect this change in the near future?


Since you are the only one who demands it?

BTW, according to German law, which - IIRC - applies to you, you must not
post emails or letters if the sender has not agreed to publish it.

Tom

0

Hello Ilias,

Ilias Lazaridis wrote:

>>>>>>> Is JetBrains willing/entitled to change the licensing status of
>>>>>>> the runtime, thus enabling a full open-source runtime?
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>

"2. It's possible, but we don't see reasons to do it at the moment."

I've stated the reason in the original message:

To fulfill such an requirement of customers.

"
Requirement:
All runtime libraries should be available with an OSI compliant
license. "

Can I expect this change in the near future?


Could you please clarify why do you need it? Actually, you are the first
customer with such requirements. You can distribute this library according
to the license agreement. You can even get the source code for it by downloading
Plugin Development Package. If you want to commit some patch, we'll review
and accept it.


[note to support@jetbrains.com: if you are CC'd from a public
conversation, your answer is expected publically]


There was no reference in your mail to the place where this public conversation
took place. If you need a public answer, please ask next time.

--
Serge Baranov
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

0

Thomas, be careful, Ilias can start E101 or something like this to discuss can he quote letters in forum or not :)

0

Hello Thomas,

>> Can I expect this change in the near future?
>>

Since you are the only one who demands it?

BTW, according to German law, which - IIRC - applies to you, you must
not post emails or letters if the sender has not agreed to publish it.

Tom


Right, it was not very polite to publish my answers without my permission.

--
Serge Baranov
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

0

Serge Baranov wrote:

Hello Thomas,

>>> Can I expect this change in the near future?
>>>
>> Since you are the only one who demands it?
>>
>> BTW, according to German law, which - IIRC - applies to you, you must
>> not post emails or letters if the sender has not agreed to publish it.


Right, it was not very polite to publish my answers without my permission.


It was very polite, against readers of the thread.

I've not identified you as the originator of the text.

[Even if: it would be ridiculous to insisit on permission in the given
context ]

.

--
http://lazaridis.com

0

Serge Baranov wrote:

Hello Ilias,

>> Ilias Lazaridis wrote:

>> "
>> Requirement:
>> All runtime libraries should be available with an OSI compliant
>> license. "
>>
>> Can I expect this change in the near future?


Could you please clarify why do you need it?



No.

>> [note to support@jetbrains.com: if you are CC'd from a public
>> conversation, your answer is expected publically]


There was no reference in your mail to the place where this public
conversation took place. If you need a public answer, please ask next time.


There was a reference:

"Newsgroup: jetbrains.intellij.community"

.

--
http://lazaridis.com

0

Thomas Singer (MoTJ) wrote:

>> Can I expect this change in the near future?

Since you are the only one who demands it?


In defence of this, ages ages ago it was mentioned on the forums that
the library behind the gui designer would be open source, the licence it
would be published under was never really mentioned, and the nunmerous
times I've asked I was pointed to ( from memory ) section 4 of the main
licence.txt - which pretty much says I was freely redist the library, we
have the source from the dev zips, but theres actualy licence saying we
can modify it and redist that.

An OSI licence for the forms-rt library and the javac2 task would be
nice - but I don't see Ilias's approach as being one that would lead Jet
Brains towards using one, rather more like leading them to reject
anything he says.

Mark

0

Hello Ilias,

>>> [note to support@jetbrains.com: if you are CC'd from a public
>>> conversation, your answer is expected publically]
>>>
>> There was no reference in your mail to the place where this public
>> conversation took place. If you need a public answer, please ask next
>> time.
>>

There was a reference:

"Newsgroup: jetbrains.intellij.community"


Right, in the headers of the e-mail. My client doesn't show them and I don't
have to look at them.

--
Serge Baranov
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

0

Hello Mark,

Thomas Singer (MoTJ) wrote:

>>> Can I expect this change in the near future?
>>>
>> Since you are the only one who demands it?
>>

In defence of this, ages ages ago it was mentioned on the forums that
the library behind the gui designer would be open source, the licence
it would be published under was never really mentioned, and the
nunmerous times I've asked I was pointed to ( from memory ) section 4
of the main licence.txt - which pretty much says I was freely redist
the library, we have the source from the dev zips, but theres actualy
licence saying we can modify it and redist that.

An OSI licence for the forms-rt library and the javac2 task would be
nice - but I don't see Ilias's approach as being one that would lead
Jet Brains towards using one, rather more like leading them to reject
anything he says.


We see no problem in doing so if there is a real demand. Ilias, unfortunately,
can't tell us why he needs it.

--
Serge Baranov
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

0

Serge Baranov wrote:

We see no problem in doing so if there is a real demand. Ilias,
unfortunately, can't tell us why he needs it.


One place where I could see it being a requirement would be for
inclusion in such projects as the Debian or Fedora Distribution.

If for instance a java application was to be distributed as a .deb, it
would make sense to make the forms-rt as a separate deb requirement,
only without it being under any official OSI licence it wouldn't be
included. ( Debian are Fedora are quite anal, but also with good
reason/intention ).

Another good idea is to at least break out the redist licence to its own
"redist-licence.txt" in the ./redist directories. This keeps the
licence ( even if it remains what it currently is ) with the
redistribable files and makes it easier to locate said licence.

0

Hello Mark,

Serge Baranov wrote:

>> We see no problem in doing so if there is a real demand. Ilias,
>> unfortunately, can't tell us why he needs it.
>>

One place where I could see it being a requirement would be for
inclusion in such projects as the Debian or Fedora Distribution.

If for instance a java application was to be distributed as a .deb, it
would make sense to make the forms-rt as a separate deb requirement,
only without it being under any official OSI licence it wouldn't be
included. ( Debian are Fedora are quite anal, but also with good
reason/intention ).

Another good idea is to at least break out the redist licence to its
own
"redist-licence.txt" in the ./redist directories. This keeps the
licence ( even if it remains what it currently is ) with the
redistribable files and makes it easier to locate said licence.


Thanks a lot for the information, we'll consider it.

--
Serge Baranov
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

0

Serge Baranov wrote:

Thanks a lot for the information, we'll consider it.


No probs...

0

Serge Baranov wrote:

Hello Ilias,

>>>> [note to support@jetbrains.com: if you are CC'd from a public
>>>> conversation, your answer is expected publically]
>>>>
>>> There was no reference in your mail to the place where this public
>>> conversation took place. If you need a public answer, please ask next
>>> time.
>>>
>> There was a reference:
>>
>> "Newsgroup: jetbrains.intellij.community"


Right, in the headers of the e-mail.


Yes.

My client doesn't show them and I don't have to look at them.


Normally not, cause a reply would go to the "Newsgroup" and not to the "CC".

But possibly you are using a beta-version of a newsreader?

If so, you should look at the headers, ensuring a reply to the right adress.

.

--
http://lazaridis.com

0

Mark Derricutt wrote:

Thomas Singer (MoTJ) wrote:

>>> Can I expect this change in the near future?
>>
>> Since you are the only one who demands it?


In defence of this, ages ages ago it was mentioned on the forums that

An OSI licence for the forms-rt library and the javac2 task would be
nice - but I don't see Ilias's approach as being one that would lead Jet
Brains towards using one, rather more like leading them to reject
anything he says.


Professionals act.

Amateurs reject.

.

--
http://lazaridis.com

0

I wish someone would just say...

I'm sorry, we can not help you. Have a nice day.

0

Please sign in to leave a comment.