+1 for B keep it simple ;-)
lg reini > Am 03.01.2015 um 22:02 schrieb Mark Struberg <[email protected]>: > > As you might have read in the previous mail I did remove some code which has > no clean IP provenance. The code seems to have been taken from the Spring > project. Although it is ALv2 and so the license is fine we still don't own > the copyright and there was no IP check done for this code. > > This all would be resolvable by going into the Spring SCM history, check who > wrote the code parts and patches, make sure it was not e.g. taken from a GPL > source, etc. After that we would need to ask Spring for a code grant. > > > All this is doable but a certain amount of work. And thus I really suggest to > do this only if we really need that code. > > 1.) do we really need those code parts? Do we need most of the spring-ant > integration? What for? > 2.) Wouldn't it be easier to write the functionality ourselves and be able to > only implement the pieces we really need? Currently all we need is > ClassLoader.getResources() and be done. > > Thus please VOTE on > > > A.) Go through the IP clearing and try to get the rights for the Spring code > > B.) Simply write those pieces ourselves. It's no rocket science, really! > > > +1 for B from me. > > > LieGrue, > strub
