On 12/5/05, Frank W. Zammetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Quick question... if one were to write a library that eventually became > a Commons project, or part of an existing Commons project, which > depended on another non-Apache library release under an LGPL license, > would that be compatible in terms of including the LGPL'd library in the > Commons component? > > I'm thinking there is three options, and only the last one do I know > would be compatible... > > (1) The LGPL'd library, or some subset of it more likely, becoming part > of the Commons codebase, leaving all applicable copyright notices and > such in place and otherwise adhearing to the requirements of the LGPL > > (2) The LGPL'd library simply being included in the Commons download in > its complete, unaltered form > > (3) Simply referencing the LGPL'd library as a dependency that people > would have to go get themselves, and linking to a download page of course > > Like I said, I know #3 is safe, but what about the others? Thanks!
Only #3 is viable. However, if the LGPL dependency was *required* by the Commons component (as opposed to being an optional add-on), then I personally would vote against such a thing, as it means the Commons component is not usable without bringing the LGPL code into the picture, rendering the Apache License on that component somewhat meaningless. -- Martin Cooper -- > Frank W. Zammetti > Founder and Chief Software Architect > Omnytex Technologies > http://www.omnytex.com > AIM: fzammetti > Yahoo: fzammetti > MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
