[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GUACAMOLE-144?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15758332#comment-15758332
]
Michael Jumper commented on GUACAMOLE-144:
------------------------------------------
The same problem exists for Logback, which is dual-licensed EPL+LGPL. The LGPL
is Category X, while EPL is not.
> Do not list Category X licenses for dual-licensed dependencies
> --------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: GUACAMOLE-144
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GUACAMOLE-144
> Project: Guacamole
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: guacamole-client
> Affects Versions: 0.9.10-incubating
> Reporter: Michael Jumper
> Assignee: Michael Jumper
> Priority: Blocker
> Fix For: 0.9.10-incubating
>
>
> From [~jmclean] regarding the [0.9.10-incubating (RC2) release
> vote|http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201612.mbox/%3CB6E93324-682C-4690-966B-EC0A4E39DDFE%40classsoftware.com%3E]:
> {quote}
> ... some files (for instance \[1]\[2]]) contain the text of the GPL license.
> GPL is Category X and is not allowed as a dependancy (unless it’s an optional
> component or build tools like autoconf in the sever artefact). I think this
> may be is OK as the software in question is dual license but if that is the
> case you should just include the text of the license you wish it to be
> licensed under no the text of both licenses. Can you please fix this in the
> next release.
> ...
> 1. ./guacamole/src/licenses/bundled/jaxb-impl-2.2.3-1/License.txt
> 2. ./guacamole/src/licenses/bundled/jersey-1.17.1/license.html
> {quote}
> Assuming it is legal to do so, the license text of bundled dependencies which
> are dual-licensed CDDL+GPL should be modified to specify only the licenses
> which actually apply to Guacamole (in this case the CDDL).
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
