On 09/07/2010 12:32 PM, Benjamin Bentmann wrote:
> Paul Gier wrote:
>
>> I couldn't find any license information currently in the mojo parent
>> POM. What license should this be under? Apache or MIT?
>
> Since you're the one asking for it, any preference?
>
> [0] names ASL-2 the preferred one for Codehaus, [1] says MIT...
>
> Question for the lawyers, if the parent POM would be ASL, can Mojo
> plugins still inherit from that and use MIT as their project license?
>
>
> Benjamin
>
>
> [0] http://codehaus.org/customs/licenses.html
> [1] http://hausmates.codehaus.org/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>
> http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>
>
Either one is fine, it seems like most of the mojo projects these days
are going with Apache, so I vote for that one.
Not sure about the legal question. I would think either license in the
parent would work fine. From the legal view the parent is probably
treated just like a dependency. The parent pom might have even less of
a connection than a normal dependency since a dependency could be
shipped with the application vs. the parent pom is only used during
build time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
