Agreed. I'm assuming that such differences are covered by the Apache License itself.
D. On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 10:38 AM, Sig Rinde <[email protected]> wrote: > And I suspect the crucial point is what is meant by "use in commercial > products" :) > > We, Thingamy, only connects to ESME, itself running unaltered on it's > own - so when we "deliver" we just include a link to ESME for the > usual download and set-up. So guess we're more of the "use _by_.." > instead. > > Sig > > On 1 February 2010 10:32, Richard Hirsch <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> When ESME is released (which is our main priority right now), this >> will happen based on the Apache License, which allows it to be used in >> commercial products - see http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0. >> >> At the moment, there are a few files in the ESME source code that have >> more restrictive licenses that do not allow them to be redistributed >> in an Apache release. We are currently in the process of fixing this >> issue. >> >> If you want, you can use ESME code right now for testing or any other >> purposes, but our SVN might occasionally contain code with more >> restrictive licenses than the Apache License, which will be cleaned up >> before the release. >> >> D. >> >> On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 10:25 PM, Uday Subbarayan >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hi Guys, >>> Is there any issues in using ESME in a commercial product? >>> >>> *I am not able to follow all the legal issues going on in the list >>> including LGPL, etc. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Uday. >>> >>> ------------------------- >>> >>> I do not blog but e-write: >>> >>> http://uds-web.blogspot.com >>> >>> >>> >> >
