Hi,
The licenses of those files are all explained and listed in the licenses/ subdirectory of the Solr distribution (same for Lucene). All those 3 files are Apache 2.0 license, see corresponding files: - ant-LICENSE-ASL.txt, but I think you are talking about junit4-ant-LICENSE-ASL.txt - commons-fileupload-LICENSE-ASL.txt - xercesImpl-LICENSE-ASL.txt If you have any doubt about the used licenses, please clearly state the lines of code that you think are GPL. There is lots of other code under MIT license (“ls licenses/*MIT*.txt”), which is perfectly valid for Apache products. But there is no GPL code listed in our official license records, which would violate Apache’s license restrictions. The files of xerces or fileupload that you mention cannot be removed, only ant/junit4-ant can be removed – because it is a test dependency only. Uwe ----- Uwe Schindler H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen <http://www.thetaphi.de/> http://www.thetaphi.de eMail: u...@thetaphi.de From: vetrik kumaran murugesan [mailto:vetri...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 3:11 AM To: dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Solr search Hi Upayavira, Thanks for your quick reply. Files above use GPL and MIT license , like junit4-ant 2.1.13 has GPL and MIT. Regards, Vetrik 2015-09-30 17:27 GMT-05:00 Upayavira <u...@odoko.co.uk>: On Wed, Sep 30, 2015, at 10:55 PM, vetrik kumaran murugesan wrote: Dear Team, I am wondering can we use Solr 5.3 search server without the following jar files, commonsfileupload: 1.2.1 xerces : xercesImpl : 2.9.1 org.apache.ant : ant : 1.8.2 If yes , how can I do it. I am trying to evaluate Solr 5.3 , you input is valuable and appreciated. Why would you want to do that? xerces is an XML parser. It wouldn't surprise me if Solr couldn't load its configs without it. Seems kinda important. All the files you mention above are (as far as I understand) Apache code, therefore Apache licensed. Why is their use a factor in your evaluation? Upayavira
