On Wed, 2004-12-22 at 03:52 +0800, Niclas Hedhman wrote: > Now, hasn't their been licensing disputes from (L)GPL camps, IIRC JBoss?? > Where they were accusing the ASF of breach of licensing. > Can't ASF pay back with the same coins, referring to their own authority > (FSF) > about that the licensing is incompatible... > So, Mr Fleury, please drop the following from your distribution (incl > non-apache); > > * log4j > * tomcat > * jetty > * beanshell > * jasper > * hsqldb > * mx4j > and on and on and on...
It's not for us to decide for project<x> whether they deem ASF-2.0
licensed software to be incompatible with their (L)GPL'ed code or not.
The people that release ASF 2.0 licensed software don't need to care
about this, because the problem is not the ASF 2.0 license but another
(in this case (L)GPL) which states that the result must be licensed
again under this "other" license (in this case (L)GPL.
In other words: The ASF IMHO does not need to care. Because the ASF 2.0
is not violated.
> In my opinion (and people here knows I'm the kind who confronts, that's no
> secret) throw that at JBoss + FSF and see the reaction. Nice Christmas
> present.
If this gives you a warm and fuzzy feeling all over, go ahead and tell
them...
Regards
Henning
--
Dipl.-Inf. (Univ.) Henning P. Schmiedehausen INTERMETA GmbH
[EMAIL PROTECTED] +49 9131 50 654 0 http://www.intermeta.de/
RedHat Certified Engineer -- Jakarta Turbine Development -- hero for hire
Linux, Java, perl, Solaris -- Consulting, Training, Development
What is more important to you...
[ ] Product Security
or [ ] Quality of Sales and Marketing Support
-- actual question from a Microsoft customer survey
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
