Btw. just a minor question, how is the issue generally handled, the reason why I am asking is, that I have some code which I would love to integrate, in both cases I have the written permission by the author to relicense the stuff in Apache2 license. In one case I have a mail, in the other one the perm in the authors blog.
Werner Sylvain Vieujot wrote: > Here is the answer from the Kupu guys. > So, there should be no problem : > > -------- Forwarded Message -------- > *From*: Duncan Booth <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > *Reply-To*: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > *To*: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > *Subject*: [kupu-dev] Re: Licence problem > *Date*: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 07:40:38 +0000 (UTC) > > Sylvain Vieujot wrote: > >> We have integrated Kupu in Apache MyFaces, and we just discovered that >> Sarissa is GPL. >> This means that we can't include Kupu as is in an Apache project. >> >> Do you guys have a solution for this ? >> > > Read the README.txt file: > >> The Sarissa ECMAScript library shipped in this distribution >> (common/sarissa.js) is the work of Manos Batis and distributed under >> the Kupu License with his kind permission. > > *So although the original Sarissa.js allows you the choice between GPL and * > *LGPL, the copy we use is actually subject to the Kupu licence.* > > > _______________________________________________ > kupu-dev mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/kupu-dev > > > On Mon, 2005-10-10 at 10:50 +0200, Werner Punz wrote: > >>Sylvain Vieujot wrote: >> >>> Downloading Sarissa it at build would be fine, for those that build from >>> source. >>> But wouldn't it prevent us from distributing the compiled version ? >>> >>Why not reuse jsf-comp as a sideproject for critical stuff, which can be >>downloaded and plugged into a running application? >> >>Sort of as an tomahawk2 thing. >>
