On 4/12/06, Tomasz Wielga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dnia 30-03-2006, czw o godzinie 15:13 -0800, Jacob Danner napisał(a): > > I notice that the project has dependencies on other libraries (boost). > > Will these libraries are included in dists or will download be required. > > If the libraries will be included, is the Boost License compatible with > > the apache license? > > The whole Boost library is meant to be a stadards breeding site for C++. > Much of its components, including all used by us, will probably be a > part of the C++ standard in the future. So I do not think it is > purposeful, though permited, to include them in distributions. > > We also use one more library - GMP, mainly for the BigInteger like > functionality. This library is distributed under LGPL, so downloading > and dynamic linking is the only possibility. In my opinion legal issue > is not a problem here, as is portability. So there is a place for > discussion.
Tomasz, Apache does not allow distribution of LGPL components within an Apache product. There are many open source licenses that are allowed, but there are a few others that are prohibited from being within the product. So, it is important to understand what you propose will be in the product and what will not. It sounds like you are saying Boost will not be part of the downloaded product. Are you saying that GMP would be required to be part of the product or just something that the user has to already have on their system (i.e. a "system requirement")? If it must be part of the download, this would need to be changed during the incubation period. Can you us a list of the licenses that apply to parts of the initial codebase that were not written by you or one of the other initial committers? Also, for anyone interested in a draft of the soon-to-be-official Apache third-party licensing policy, see http://people.apache.org/~cliffs/3party.html. Thanks, Cliff
