Hi all, If you *redistribute* Xerces (or any other Apache software) I'm pretty sure you must include a copy of the license. That also applies to derivative works. There's an FAQ [1] on the main Apache site which explains the terms of the license. It should answer most of your questions.
[1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/licence-FAQ.html#WhatDoesItMEAN Michael Glavassevich XML Parser Development IBM Toronto Lab E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Robert William Vesterman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 11/18/2005 02:22:51 PM: > Please correct me if I am wrong: > > You're saying that you only have to include the license (and so forth) if > you're using Xerces to build something whose purpose is similar to that of > Xerces? For example, if you're building an XML parser? > > And on the other hand, if you're just using Xerces to save and retrieve data > for your application which otherwise has nothing to do with XML, you don't > have to include the license? For example, if you're building an email client > that happens to store its configuration using XML? > > If that's not what you're saying, could you please elaborate? > > If it is what you're saying, does anyone agree or disagree? > > And just to be explicit: This is, or is not, the case regardless of the > commercial/non-commercial/open/closed/et cetera status of the thing you're > building? > > Thanks. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Alberto Massari [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, November 18, 2005 12:41 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Licensing question > > > Hi Rafael, > I am no lawyer, so don't take this as an authorative answer, nor as > the official word from Apache; but I would say that if you just > compile against Xerces, you have no obligations (apart not claiming > that you wrote also the Xerces library). > The LICENSE file has to be distributed only if you create a > "Derivative work" (e.g. an XML parser that starts from Xerces and > adds new features; otherwise "for the purposes of this License, > Derivative Works shall not include works that remain separable from, > or merely link (or bind by name) to the interfaces of, the Work and > Derivative Works thereof.") > > Hope this helps, > Alberto > > At 22.25 17/11/2005 +0000, Rafael Sousa (Ext_Altior) wrote: > >Hi all! > > > >I'm using Xerces-C++ on my project. I have the libxerces-c.so.27.0 file > >under some directory in a commercial system, and my software uses it. No > >changes were made to Apaches' source code. > > > >My question is: What does the Apache License Version 2.0 obliges? Is it > >just to distribute the LICENCE file along with the .so file? Does it > >suffice to have it in the same directory as the .so file? > > > >Thanks in advance, > > > >Rafael Sousa > > >
