2007/9/13, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Jimmy,Jing Lv wrote: > > So do we need to write a official letter or let them sign some > > agreement? Or just let them send Harmony a copy of src code with BSD > > license? Sorry I don't know much on such legal issues. > > No, they would not be licensing it under an alternative license just for > us, so I would expect to see a change to the licensing on their > distribution site, and we can create a dependency that picks the code up > directly from there under those terms.
In the lastest mail two author has agreed to execute the relicensing in their CVS repository and then submit the code to Harmony repository (Great, isn't it! :) ). It may take time that they still need to identify the parts originating from 3rd parties. What's more, they have their own plan to keep the tritonus project alive as a repository for the plugins, so it would be ideal to separate the Java Sound core and the plugins in their mind. And then Harmony will "own" the core, and tritonus will maintain the plugins, which Harmony can integrate easily as precompiled .jar files (or with regular source drops from tritonus). It do make sense to Harmony IMHO :) So let's now wait a while for re-licensing. :) > > > IMHO, BSD and apache license are both OK for this re-license. And > > the two authors seems don't care about it much. :) > > Hmm, ok then we'll take it under the Apache License version 2.0 please, > since that will make the licensing of Harmony as a whole more homogeneous. > > Regards, > Tim > -- Best Regards! Jimmy, Jing Lv China Software Development Lab, IBM
