I brought this topic up again in a recent posting with selenium developers. They were looking at replacing their CSS selector code with a jquery solution. When they make this replacement they are planning to replace their LGPL CSS selector code. They said in their 2.0 release but I don't know when this will occur.
It may be easier to just replace it with a dojo selector solution and give them the patch, but I haven't had time to look into this yet. Brett On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 11:17 AM, Jacques Le Roux < [email protected]> wrote: > Here are the 2 links > http://dean.edwards.name/my/cssQuery/ > > http://code.google.com/p/ajaxslt/source/browse/trunk/xpath.js?spec=svn37&r=37 > > It seems that xpath has been enhanced since. But I guess selenium core code > also. > > I'd appreciate some help, anyway it's waiting for years now... > > Thanks > > Jacques > PS : Mmm, there seems to be a bad and a good news see > http://markmail.org/message/a73qeqeyb4lokjzg > good : according to Brett xpath is not a problem (I was not sure when I > wrote that 1st time) > bad : no news of Edwards Dean :/ > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Ashish Vijaywargiya > To: [email protected] > Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2009 1:48 PM > Subject: Re: Dual licensing > > > +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_12470728 > if 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] > > > >
