On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 10:33 AM, Justi Kd <[email protected]> wrote: > > > You are welcome to approach them on our behalf if you feel strongly > > about the issue. > > > > Oleg > > > > > > > > > > > I think it's quite important to remove this because what seems trivial or > non-issue > for us developers may prove to be an obstacle when challenged by > managers/legal folks > and at the end of the day it's about replying: this is ASL2 OR this is ASL2 > 'but' and > I don't think we need to be put in a position to explain any 'but' or deal > with any > adoption barrier that might pop later due to this. > > Anyway, I did some searches and I couldn't find direct contact info for the > authors > (excluding twitter). I'll keep on searching but if you have any 'ideas' don't > hesitate > to send me a direct email. > > Another way to resolve this would be to somehow make these "optional" and > state that > this library *optionally* depends on these by doing x,y,z and are not > required to make > use of the library.
For what it's worth, while going through Surefire parallel / fork documentation a couple of weeks ago, I came across a ASL licensed version of the JCIP annotations [1], which is also available on Maven Central [2]. One option would be for the project to change the dependency for JCIP annotations to com.github.stephenc.jcip:jcip-annotations; alternately any consumer can exclude the net.jcip:jcip-annotations from the HTTP Core/Client dependency and add the com.github.stephenc.jcip:jcip-annotations to their project. Though I have not verified it, but it should work. - Bindul [1] https://github.com/stephenc/jcip-annotations [2] http://search.maven.org/#artifactdetails|com.github.stephenc.jcip|jcip-annotations|1.0-1|jar > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
