
Facebook relicenses RocksDB under Apache 2 license - spicyj
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-303
======
boulos
Amusingly, the commit removes the LICENSE file which had the original LevelDb
(from Google) copyright and LICENSE notice:

[https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/commit/3c327ac2d0fd50bbd...](https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/commit/3c327ac2d0fd50bbd82fe1f1af5de909dad769e6#diff-9879d6db96fd29134fc802214163b95aL9)

Did RocksDB finally remove _every_ last piece of code from LevelDB?

Disclosure: I work at Google, but IANAL.

~~~
Steeeve
The LevelDB copyright notice is still in place, so presumably no.

~~~
boulos
(I meant that a bit rhetorically, sorry)

Definitely not :). In fact, all the LevelDB copyright notices now point to a
dangling LICENSE file:

> // Copyright (c) 2011 The LevelDB Authors. All rights reserved.

> // Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be

> // found in the LICENSE file. See the AUTHORS file for names of
> contributors.

CONTRIBUTING
([https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING...](https://github.com/facebook/rocksdb/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md))
presumably needs updating as well to cover the variations (including the GPLv2
addition that happened a few months ago apparently).

------
rogerb
Nice to see Facebook taking this feedback to heart. Thanks!

~~~
johnnyfaehell
I am curious why do you think they are taking it to heart instead of just
complying. I think when something goes under the Apache Foundation it is no
longer owned by Facebook but the Apache Foundation, so they may have been
required to.

Edit: Nevermind I thought RocksDB was a project already given to ASF.

------
rurban
React also on Monday.
[https://github.com/facebook/react/issues/10191](https://github.com/facebook/react/issues/10191)

~~~
danabramov
To be clear, as of now I have not heard of intentions to relicense React. I
will try to follow up on Monday and see if I can get any official response
out, but I wouldn’t count on this happening for React as well.

------
rdslw
Does it mean that the whole megathread
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14779881](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14779881)
didnt notice it, and toppost there is wrong? ;)

~~~
kronos29296
React hasn't been relicensed.(Maybe it will soon) This one is also fairly
recent. I may be wrong but many FB projects seem to be using this license. It
is just that React is popular enough to cause problems orgs using it.

------
fermigier
New wording: "This source code is licensed under BOTH the GPLv2 (found in the
LICENSE file in the root directory of this source tree. An additional grant
COPYING file in the root directory) and Apache 2.0 License" (emphasis on
"BOTH" mine).

-> IANAL, nor a native english speaker, but shouldn't it be "EITHER" instead of "BOTH" ?

~~~
richardwhiuk
No it should be BOTH. You can use it under the terms of either, but it is
licensed under both. If it was licensed under EITHER the obvious follow up is
- Well which is it actually licensed under?

IANAL either but I am a native UK English speaker.

