geometry-api-java use non free json.org

[puntogil]

Hi,
Fedora [1] is a popular distribution of the Linux operating system, and
we wish to include the latest version of geometry-api-java in our OS.
Fedora only contains Free and Open Source licensed works.

Your project is licensed under Apache License Version 2,
but your code use from json.org under Douglas Crockford’s bad licence, and is non-free [2].
Such usage restriction makes the license incompatible with The Open Source Definition and
The Free Software Definition. Because geometry-api-java binary distribution includes this software,
it effectively becomes proprietary software itself.

You may also comment that the json.org license is valid for You [3] but for many Linux distributions it is not acceptable.

Hoping in the future to be able to use geometry-api-java in Fedora, without having to run into this problem.

Please try to replace it with one of the many free alternatives.

Thanks in advance
Regards

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Project_Wiki

[2]
https://wiki.debian.org/qa.debian.org/jsonevil
http://www.sonatype.com/people/2012/03/use-json-well-youd-better-not-be-evil/
http://tanguy.ortolo.eu/blog/article46/json-license

[3] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#json

[randallwhitman]

This is great news that Fedora would like to package the Geometry API for Java.

Because geometry-api-java binary distribution includes [json.org] software ...

Wouldn't a Linux distro build the library from scratch, rather than ship a pre-compiled binary/jar file?

[stolstov]

Internally we don't access this class directly, but through an abstract JSONReader. So it's easy to remove, but it would be a breaking API change.

[puntogil]

Hi
Thanks for your interest

Wouldn't a Linux distro build the library from scratch, rather than ship a pre-compiled binary/jar file?

yes, we build all libraries from their sources
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/Guidelines#No_inclusion_of_pre-built_binaries_or_libraries

Internally we don't access this class directly, but through an abstract JSONReader. So it's easy to remove, but it would be a breaking API change.

maybe, you might consider the approach used for skyscreamer/JSONassert#44

Thanks
Regards

[stolstov]

@puntogil Removing this dependency would be a breaking API change regardless of the approach.

[randallwhitman]

@puntogil Can you provide a merge/pull request like that of skycreamer?

[randallwhitman]

@puntogil https://github.com/Esri/geometry-api-java/releases/tag/v2.0.0