Torsten Curdt wrote:
Actually I think we could make our lifes much easier by having better build systems! So we would only have the Apache code in out repositories and let the build system get the external dependencies for us. AFAIK this should save us from legal troubles.
No, not necessarely. The problem with LGPL is that it doesn't define (in java) where the library stops and where your program starts. Having it downloaded from another machine, doesn't change that at all.
The distributions would become much smaller (less load and traffic for the Apache web sites) and it's the ideal sollution when you don't need and or want some optional components.
..the only drawback is that the distributions are not self-contained and not compile-able out-of-the-box.
I mean I hate it when I have to collect all the libraries to build a specific project - but hey: if the build system does that for me I am fine :)
This is what several different efforts are trying to do. I think there is enough pressure for this that something will come out.
I would even have the benefit to (de)select optional packages!!
...it's so ridiculous that even mock classes have to have the same license as the full implementation. (Someone really really sure about this?)
For those who don't know what a moch class is (sorry Torsten, but don't forget you are talking to a language-neutral community here), several java projects that depend on many different libraries (potentially optional) created what we call "moch classes" instead of placing the libraries in CVS.
A moch class is a skeleton class.
It contains only the (empty) methods and data definitions. It is used to allow us to compile our code in a strongly-typed fashion (compared to the reflection idea which is weakly typed - therefore, if you mispell the method name the compiler will compile anyway and you would just fail at runtime).
Moch classes are very handy (they allow, for example, Cocoon to be compiled under compilation-intensive IDEs such as Eclipse without having to download *all* the libraries that we depend on which we are not legally allowed to redistribute)
Cocoon developers suggested that we could use moch classes to get around LGPL problems, but I voted against that approach because a moch class *IS* a derivative work of that library (even if a very dumb derivative work), thus we cannot license the moch class under the apache license and we are back on the LGPL problem, even if it covers just that thin moch code.
There is no official statement around the use of moch classes, just my negative vote and Torsten is asking for more official statements on this.
-- Stefano Mazzocchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate [William of Ockham] --------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
