On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 08:28:35PM +0800, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> On Sunday 09 November 2003 18:36, Martin Man wrote:
> > The port is named CCAvalon Framework, since it is developed in C++ and will
> > be released under APL. I'm not sure whether this name is not conflicting
> > with the license under which Avalon itself is published because I'm not
> > quite able to tell whether CCAvalon can be considered as being "derived
> > product", and whether I'm not using the "Avalon" part of the name CCAvalon
> > to promote the product itself.
> 
> AFAICT, you are not supposed to use Apache names in derived products, without 
> the expressed permission of the relevant PMC.

Sure I know that, my questions should have been formulated as:

Is CCAvalon Framework, the C++ port of Jakarta Avalon Framework derived
product of Jakarta Avalon Framework?

Should I try to obtain the permission, and if so what'd be the best way to do
it.

Should I choose completely new name without any connection to Avalon?

Am I then able to safely mention that the port is based on Jakarta Avalon,
e.g., could this be considered "promoting the product using Avalon name" ??

> > I'm not in any way aspiring (at least no yet) at making CCAvalon an
> > official product of ASF (though I'd be very happy if it happens), but if
> > there will be any interest, I'm willing to do the necessary.
> 
> That could be discussed, but as of now there are a few problems (see below).

I know about all of them, that's exactly why I'm not at this moment even
considering it. All of them can be refactored out (some of them requiring huge
amount of time) but there must be interest for it.

> [snip the discussion about licenses of different CCAvalon dependencies]
>
> BSD, Mozilla, APL are considered "commercial-friendly", whereas GPL, LGPL
> and others are less so, and not compatible.
> 
> > [snip/]
> 
> > Martin Man [the emeritus commiter of the Apache Cocoon II project]
> 
> If you were active committer, you should know the licensing issues already.

sure I do know, completely agree with you.

My main goal at this moment is to get the code out so that others can
see/use/modify it without being scared whether I'm not violating any of the
licenses. The questions above stay unanswered for me.

> FYI, there is also a C# version under construction to run on .Net, and IMHO 
> there could be forming a community to support non-Java ports.

thanx, going to google for them...

> Niclas

thanx,
martin

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to