Versions Compared


  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.


Code Block
 *  (C) 2013-2015, Apache Foundation
 *  (C) 2001-2012, Open Source Geospatial Foundation (OSGeo)
 * Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
 * you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
 * You may obtain a copy of the License at
 * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
 * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
 * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
 * limitations under the License.
 * This package contains documentation from OpenGIS specifications.
 * OpenGIS consortium's work is fully acknowledged here.

Code Contribution Reference Material



V. Obligations of the Foundation

The Foundation hereby grants the Contributor the non­exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty­free, license to use, copy, prepare derivative works of, publicly display or perform, and distribute the Submission.

In the event the Foundation makes the Submission available to third parties, it shall do so only in accordance with the requirements of the by­laws of the Foundation, currently hosted at In particular, the portions of the Submission integrated to the core library will be licensed to the third party under a license approved as an open source license by the Open Source Initiative, or any substantially similar license that meets the Open Source Definition or Free Software Definition. The specific license used will be chosen in suitable consultation with the group governing the ProjectProject. The portions of the Submission integrated to the Geotools documentation, web site, or other ancillary portions of the Geotools project may be licensed to the third party under any license with suitable terms for such material, including without limitation the GNU Free Documentation License or the Berkeley Software Distribution license. The portions of the Submission integrated into the code tutorials may be licensed to the third party under terms with fewer restrictions including without limitation placing the tutorial code into the public domain.

The Contributor understands that the decision to include the Submission in the Project is entirely that of the Foundation, and the Foundation will not be obligated to make the Submission available as part of the Project. The Foundation acknowledges that, except as explicitly described in this Agreement, the Submission is provided on an “AS IS” BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF TITLE, NON­ INFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY, OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.



Hello all

I'm Martin Desruisseaux, a former GeoTools 2 contributor and now a developer of the project (
In our search for a community, we had a recent discussion with members of the Apache Spatial Information System project (, which is in incubation. A small email exchange gave me the feeling that our design goals could be in phase. We would like to offer them the code. In order to make that possible, we need OSGeo permission to re-license from its current LGPL 2.1 license to the more permissive Apache license. The proposal is not to transfer the totality of to Apache SIS, but to allow them to review the code and pick-up whatever they wish on a case-by-case basis. The transition to Apache SIS would probably be slow and very progressive. is a fork of GeoTools 2.6 followed by 4 years of developments. The project contains two parts: "core" and "pending". Our proposal is to begin with the "core" part, which include material derived from the following GeoTools 2.6 modules:
* utilities
* metadata
* referencing
* core of coverage (excluding I/O)
* many (but not all) Swing widgets

In 2008 those modules were written (according SVN history) at 95% by myself, Geomatys or IRD institute. The remaining 5% were written by other GeoTools contributors. To my knowledge, everyone signed the copyright assignment on which grants copyright to OSGeo. However because the GeoTools community may have vested interest in this re-licensing decision, I wish to ask on this mailing list.

I would like to emphases that this is not a demand for relicensing current GeoTools, but only relicensing of the GeoTools 2.6 code from which "Geotidy" (the precursor) is derived, which is 4 years old. If the community accepts to grant us the permission to relicense 100% of "core", that would be truly appreciated. But in case of bjection, we are willing to rewrite the 5% of "core" code which was not written by myself, Geomatys or IRD.

It the community accepts re-licensing, this would allows Apache SIS to gain services they are currently missing, allows code base to gain a community, and possibly allows the GeoTools project to gain a metadata and referencing library maintained by a trusted foundation, which could complete or replace the current referencing module as GeoTools wish. The Geotk referencing module got 4 years of extensive development since our departure, and has capabilities which are - to my knowledge - unique in the open source world.

Martin Desruisseaux

Request withdrawn:


Hello all

Two weeks ago, we posted a request to the GeoTools PMC asking permission to re-license portions of GeoTools 2.6. However since that time, we reformulated our demand as a request to the OSGeo board to state whatever the Contributor's rights, which is granted "perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty­free, license to use, copy, prepare derivative works of, publicly display or perform, and distribute the Submission", include the right to re-license his own code. Adrian Custer, who wrote the Copyright Assignment together with a Lawyer, confirmed us very clearly that the intend was to give unrestricted rights to the contributor over his own code, including re-licensing, providing that all other contributions are removed. This is also the right of those who signed the Contributor Agreement instead than the Copyright Assignment.

The OSGeo board is expected to take a decision in their meeting scheduled August 9. If the OSGeo vote is positive, then we would like to withdrawn our request to the GeoTools PMC. We decided to re-license only the code that we wrote, with all other contributions omitted or rolled back. Of course the procedure can continue if the GeoTools community still wants to examine the question, but it could be driven as a procedure independent of our current request.