I'm not a lawyer so will neither wrestle or argue legal points. Some non-legal points
- Signing will make changing JARs problematic. - Updates also will force you to retweak. - If the JARs are delivered as part of something else you may not have a chance to modify - User permissions on the machine may not allow for modification (we have scenarios where we run off CDs and don't use any local storage) Jeff Rob Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 04/13/2006 11:47 AM Please respond to [email protected] To [email protected] cc Jeff McAffer/Ottawa/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject Re: Fixed bug in class loading Does anyone have a real example where a commercial software vendor has actually refused to allow someone to adjust the bundle Manifest of their licensed bundle so that it would work better in an OSGi environment? As a commercial software vendor, I can quite honestly say: * We include numerous 3rd party JARs, some commercial, in our OSGi bundle set and in no case has any software vendor refused to allow us to change or add to their manifest even if their license did not explicitly grant this right * Frankly we could care less if someone wants to modify bundle manifests of any of our JARs, even if doing so is against the letter of our license. As long as they are making legal use of our software, and paying us any requisite fee we're happy to have them as a customer. Ok, if their changes break something we might not cover helping them fix it under standard support - but aside from this, the widest possible legal use of our software is fine with us. Simply changing a manifest (esp. the import / export parts) may not be strictly legal - but I suspect most vendors won't object if you explain your needs and ask for permission. You wouldn't be getting any usage or redistribution rights out of doing so, but you'd be making use of their software which is what most vendors want! Regards -- Rob
