+1 -- Ashish
Jacques Le Roux wrote:
Interesting post. This closes the discussion we had some time (years) ago whith Chris Howe : Dual licensing is not a problem for ASL2 (as long as one licence is compatible)Also about Selenium IDE, maybe, as Hans did for docbook, we could ask the 2 persons who are listed here https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-680?focusedCommentId=12470728&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#action_12470728if we could use their tools with another ASL2 compatible licence. This would allow us to embedd Selenium (and the work done by Andrew Sykes)Jacques From: "Sam Ruby" <[email protected]>On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 3:07 PM, Ceki Gulcu <[email protected]> wrote:Hello, I am curious about ASF's position on dual licensing. Given the definitions in [1], if project P is dual licensed under both the EPL (category B) and LGPL (category C), does the ASF consider P to be licensed under category B or category C? Since any distributor or any end-user can choose between the EPL and LGPL at any time, including before or after distribution has occurred, the ASF could consider P to be licensed under EPL (category B) without prejudice to downstream actors (other than the terms of the EPL).Concrete example: http://docs.jquery.com/License This is made available under a category A license, and it totally acceptable for use by ASF projects. The fact that it additionally is made available under a different license does not impose any additional restrictions on us. This would be equally true if the second license were proprietary. The above assumes that we and our downstream users are the Licensees. As licensors, we do not dual license our code.Cheers, [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html- Sam Ruby --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
