It is not a violation of the Apache license, nor of the LGPL; but it has
been ASF policy to not release software that requires the use of
non-BSD-licensed software. I suppose that is a fuzzy line - do we use
Linux-specific kernel calls, for example, or GCC-only macros? - but the
overall principle is that if someone needs to agree to an additional
license to use Apache code, then the Apache code is essentially under that
licese.
Brian
On Wed, 3 Sep 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> we have a script that uses an LGPL jar file during execution time.
>
> To run the script, Maven will automatically download the LGPL jars, they
> are not stored in CVS, or shipped with Maven.
>
> Is it ok by ASF policy to include the above script as part of Maven?
>
> ----- Forwarded by dIon Gillard/Multitask Consulting/AU on 03/09/2003
> 09:16 AM -----
>
> "Eric Pugh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 03/09/2003 07:46:11 AM:
>
> > Ben,
> >
> > I looked at your version, and mine I think is better on the referencing
> of
> > findbugs jars, while yours actually generates a report!
> >
> > Can someone verify that even though there are no import statements, the
> > usage of the lgpl jar prevents it from being ASF compatible. This is
> > related to that LGPL is Viral? thread on slashdot a while ago. I
> believe
> > that all of the plugins on maven-plugins only really exist there because
> > they use LGPL jars.
> >
> > Could someone else maybe speak up on this? Dion in an email on Aug 7th
> > specified that it couldn't go in.. I guess we need to make a decision
> and
> > decide which way to go!
> >
> > Eric
> --
> dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
> Blog: http://blogs.codehaus.org/people/dion/
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
