With all respect to everyone involved, I really doubt that the infra list is the best place for the Camel PMC to refine their understanding of how best to cope with glue code for an LGPL dependency. If infra@ feels that fixing the email flow from extras to core lists is inappropriate due to their view of this question, then the best thing would be for Camel to go sort this out with legal and/or the board. If Camel gets a green light for glue code as a project at extras, fine, it's a technology issue. If they don't, this thread is moot.
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Daniel Shahaf <d...@daniel.shahaf.name> wrote: > Christian Müller wrote on Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 19:29:21 +0200: >> Sorry for being inaccurate. I didn't understood your response as you mean >> it (only after your last mail). I'm not an English native speaker. Please >> have understanding for it... >> > > No problem. > >> We cannot move the camel-extra sources to Apache hardware because they have >> dependencies which are not allowed at Apache (e.g. the camel-hibernate >> component use Hibernate which is LGPL v2.1). >> > > Apache releases must be under the ALv2 but nonetheless may have LGPL > libraries as optional dependencies. I won't comment specifically on > your case since I don't know the details. > >> May be I have a wrong understanding what the purpose of Apache-Extra is. Do >> you have any pointers for me where I can verify my comprehension? > > I am not aware of any apache.org/ page that explains apache-extras.org. > (That's probably an issue for for site-dev@.)
