Sam Ruby wrote:
Again, Cliff's words:
http://people.apache.org/~cliffs/3party.html#options-optional
Tell me if you read them differently than I do, or have suggestions on
how the draft should change.
I read them differently.
http://people.apache.org/~cliffs/3party.html#transition-examples-lgpl
says that LGPL works must not be "included" in Apache projects. (quotes
are mine around a somewhat ambiguous term). This may simply mean that if
the jar does not reside anywhere at Apache this section has been
complied with.
http://people.apache.org/~cliffs/3party.html#options-optional. What is
an "add-on"? The way I read the wording is that the add-on is something
licensed under the LGPL. This would imply that it is NOT Apache authored
code but the jar containing the LGPL'd work. By this interpretation it
is perfectly fine to have code at Apache that contains imports of LGPL'd
interfaces so long as the LGPL'd code itself doesn't reside at Apache.
To me the implication is that a default build of the project should
never build this optional piece that requires the LGPL'd work. In order
for someone to build it they must be required to find the instructions
along with the public notice of the license restrictions.
Whether this interpretation is what Cliff actually intended is another
matter. I just know that one of the reasons the discussion began was the
strong desire to be able to support the use of Hibernate in some of the
projects.
Ralph
