Great！
在 16/1/1 02:35, Dmitriy Setrakyan 写道:
I tend to agree with Raul.
We have been anal-retentive to a fault with regard to LGPL, instead of
focusing on usability. Our users are already required to take a conscious
step to include LGPL modules into Ignite builds, so there is no implicit
“drag-in”, as Raul mentioned.
I would vote for publishing all Ignite modules to Maven, without exception.
D.
On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 5:21 AM, Raul Kripalani <ra...@apache.org> wrote:
Hi Brane,
On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 8:58 AM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> wrote:
We'd be publishing modules that can't be used without the LGPL
components. I'm not sure how that stands WRT our policies but I can't
see how it would be a service to our users to actively nudge them
towards using restrictive-licensed code.
The ASF policies specify that, as long as our components are optional and
not needed by the core project, we can publish them, obviously *without*
packaging the LGPL binary nor implicitly "dragging it in" during the build.
This can be achieved with a 'runtime' scope in Maven.
It does make a huge difference to the end user of these 3 modules – being
able to reference ignite-hibernate and simply having to manually drop in
the Hibernate dependency vs. having to: (1) check out the source, (2) run
the build, (3) publish the artifacts in their corporate Nexus repo, etc. +
having to do this *for each release*.
*Raúl Kripalani*
PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big Data and
Messaging Engineer
http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk
