Regarding the ssh agent thing, there are two options: * Exclude the conflicting transitive dependency. * Upgrading the version to a newer one with a compatible license.
For the latter we need to wait for a karat fix, and the former has already been tested and it works as expected. I propose to merge the exclusion PR, and bump the version in a future release once the pending karat think is unlocked. The approach has already been tested and worked, and even it is not the ideal solution, IMHO it's not a big deal. On 6 October 2014 21:58, Andrew Phillips <aphill...@qrmedia.com> wrote: >> It would be great if someone with better knowledge could give some >> light on this, and if LGPL dependencies can be used. > > > That would be great, indeed. What I've been able to gather is the same as > you: as jclouds, we shouldn't have any problem releasing this. > > The point Alex was originally trying to make when he raised this, though (as > far as I understood) was a different one: if we suddenly include an LGPL > lib, it becomes impossible for anyone to bundle jclouds in a product that is > not LGPL-compliant. > > Of course, they could jump through some hoops to try to exclude it (like > Brooklyn did), but my guess is that, if they know, they would simply skip > 1.8.1 and future releases until this is fixed. Data on this point would be > welcome, but the absence of more evidence I think we should be conservative > and take the one datapoint that we have (from Alex) that this is a Real > Problem. > > ap
