What about raising this problem on legal-discuss and see what it gives ?
Chris, do you want to take a stab at it ?

On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 4:55 PM, Chris Custine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes sorry, JBoss is LGPL.  We do actually import JBoss classes in JBIService
>  and JBIDeployer but all LGPL dependencies are marked as provided in the
>  pom.xml.  So when we ship binaries, they are free from LGPL code, and when a
>  developer builds on their own machine, they are downloading the JBoss jars
>  from maven central themselves so at least we aren't shipping any LGPL code.
>
>  Obviously we will want to run this through legal-discuss if we get that far,
>  but I wanted to see if anyone was interested in the first place.
>
>  Chris
>
>
>
>
>
>  On Jan 28, 2008 12:52 AM, Guillaume Nodet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  > As David said, I'd be really happy to bring it back in our main svn repo
>  > if
>  > possible.
>  > The main problem is the legal aspects.
>  > One thing is that IIRC (but it should be easy to confirm) is that we don't
>  > actually
>  > have any dependenies on JBoss code, because the SAR we build does not
>  > require any API or so (only the SAR descriptor).
>  > In such a case, I think we would be ok to import it.
>  >
>  > And to answer David's question, JBoss is LGPL.
>  >
>  > On Jan 28, 2008 5:18 AM, Chris Custine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  >
>  > > I have noticed several questions recently regarding the JBoss deployer
>  > > code
>  > > that is at codehaus and after looking into the code a bit I am wondering
>  > > if
>  > > anyone is interested in moving that to Apache under the platforms module
>  > > similar to the geronimo plugins.  One of the main reasons that the
>  > > deployer
>  > > is not working with 3.2 or 3.3 is that the dependencies (specifically
>  > > exclusions of transient deps from servicemix-core) are specific to each
>  > > ServiceMix release and the current JBoss deployer code is specific to
>  > > 3.1.2.
>  > > I have fixed the issues locally to make things work with 3.2 and 3.3,
>  > but
>  > > while I am at it I wanted to see if moving it to the ServiceMix SVN was
>  > > something worth exploring.
>  > >
>  > > I looked into the whole GPL issue and since we are only compiling
>  > against
>  > > GPL code that is available on maven central repo and not shipping or
>  > > packaging any GPL code, I believe there are no issues with licensing.
>  > >
>  > > This is just an idea, so any thoughts?
>  > >
>  > > Thanks,
>  > > Chris
>  > >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > --
>  > Cheers,
>  > Guillaume Nodet
>  > ------------------------
>  > Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>  >
>



-- 
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/

Reply via email to