On 25 January 2011 16:16, Antonio Petrelli <antonio.petre...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2011/1/25 Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org>: >>> EPL is more restrictive than ASLv2, therefore it is OK for EPL licensed >>> projects to consume ASLv2 code... on the other hand it is not so acceptible >>> for ASLv2 licensed projects to consume EPL licensed projects. >> >> That is completely not true. Read the actual document you linked to. An >> Apache project can consume EPL binaries. > > For more info about accepted licenses: > http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html#criteriaandcategories > IOW, you can link to any A and B licensed software without any problem. > A particular case is LGPL. The license allows you to link to a > LGPL-licensed software, however you cannot redistribute it in an > Apache Licensed package.
Also you cannot bundle the source of an EPL licensed project within an Apache distribution. Whereas you can bundle the source of an ASL licensed project within an Apache distribution. > > Antonio > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
