I should have thought of this sooner, but I went and looked at COLT and it includes a GenericSorter! I’m short on time today to verify this is the same one as Saxon uses, but assuming it is, I’d say then Saxon should be ok.
Also, I haven’t reviewed Justin’s changes to L & N in detail, but from the check-in notes, I don’t see anything that looks wrong. I did just download the binary package. I think some changes need to be made to the build script to pull out the W3C licenses to where they are supposed to be. -Alex On 1/4/15, 6:32 AM, "Alex Harui" <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: >From [1], I would interpret the following: > >For the purposes of being a dependency to an Apache product, which >licenses are considered to be similar in terms to the Apache License >2.0?Works under the following licenses may be included within Apache >products: > >* Apache License 2.0 <http://apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0> ><many licenses skipped> >* License for CERN packages in COLT ><http://acs.lbl.gov/software/colt/license.html> but note that this applies >only to CERN packages in COLT and not others > >to mean that we need approval to use the CERN sort algorithm bundled in >Saxon. I agree with Justin that Legal really should approve, but >technically they haven’t. But if approved, then yes, we need to change >NOTICE as Justin said. There is a complex set of NOTICES that come with >Saxon. I think Justin and I agree that some don’t need to be in our >NOTICE. > > >[1] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html > > >On 1/4/15, 5:54 AM, "Erik de Bruin" <e...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote: > >>That is awesome! >> >>So, just change NOTICE and we're done with this? >> >>EdB >> >> >> >>On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 2:51 PM, Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> >>wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>>> If you and Alex keep on disagreeing >>> >>> I actually don't think there's any disagreement here. >>> >>> Justin >> >> >> >>-- >>Ix Multimedia Software >> >>Jan Luykenstraat 27 >>3521 VB Utrecht >> >>T. 06-51952295 >>I. www.ixsoftware.nl >
