On Apr 6, 2008, at 10:02 AM, Hiram Chirino wrote:
3. we could also just not distribute right?
Yes but IIUC this makes it rather iffy for anyone who wants to use
the multicast discovery(?) stuff in activemq -- they have to find the
appropriate jar themselves (which one????) and decipher the licensing
which is far from clear at the moment and figure out how to get it
into the appropriate classpath. Also use of the javax.jmdns classes
in activemq code might possibly annoy sun.
I already did (2) locally, it only took about 15 minutes.
thanks
david jencks
On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 3:47 AM, David Jencks
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
While reviewing the legal files (LICENSE and NOTICE) for activemq
4.1-SNAPSHOT I discovered that the build depends on and the assembly
distributes a jar activemq:jmdns:1.0-RC2:jar. I'm having some
trouble
figuring out exactly where this came from and what license it
might be
under.
I found that at one point the codehaus activemq project had
something
related to this...
http://fisheye.codehaus.org/browse/maven/repository/activemq/
jmdns/1.0-RC2
but it doesn't appear to be there now.
I found a sourceforge jmdns project
http://jmdns.sourceforge.net/
which claims to be lgpl licensed.
There's a jmdns:jmdnds:1.0:jar in maven which might be from this
project:
the class names appear to match.
Now if you look at the cvs view of this sourceforge project,
there's an
apache license and notice file checked into the root. Furthermore
the
javax.jmdns.* classes indicate in headers that they are apache 2
licensed.
However there are some com.strangeberry classes and samples
classes that
have only a LGPL licence header. The com.strangeberry classes are
included
in both jars I've found.
Furthermore I can't find any evidence that the javax.jmdns
classes are part
of a java jsr, so I have a hard time believing their use of the javax
namespace is, um, legal.
So, I see two problems
1. inclusion of lgpl classes in an apache distribution
2. javax namespace with no apparent permission from sun.
With this understanding of the situation I'd have a hard time voting
anything other than -1 on any release that included one of the
existing
jmdns jars.
Unless there is more to the story than I've found out so far I
see two ways
to proceed:
1. work with the jmdns project to release a jar that is clearly
apache 2
licensed and is ok sun-wise
2. produce our own jar with only the apache licensed jmdns
classes under a
sun-friendly package name (such as org.apache.activemq.jmdns).
I'm interested in getting a 4.1.2 release out ASAP so I'd be
happy to set
up a module in activemq to do (2) and modify the use of the jmdns
classes as
appropriate. I could work on (1) as well but think it isn't
likely to
happen in the next day or so.
Thoughts on how to proceed?
thanks
david jencks
--
Regards,
Hiram
Blog: http://hiramchirino.com
Open Source SOA
http://open.iona.com
