Did you know that the Cocoon guys have jimi.jar in their CVS? I wonder
if that's correct and if yes, I think we should do it, too.

Reading the licence I get the impression that redistribution of the jar
is possible but not without restrictions. IANAL so who can we ask if
distributing this jar is ok?

I get the impression that things like that will be an everlasting
problem. There should be a central source of information on licencing at
Apache. A place where the gathered legal knowledge can be hammered in
stone and be reused by other projects. Even the fact that we didn't
include jimi.jar and Cocoon did gives me an uneasy feeling that the
licence-sweep held at the XML project last year wasn't done 100% right.

I'd like to escalate that topic again. What I think would be in the best
interest of the Apache Foundation would be a central source of
information where all projects and subprojects can get information on
licencing. The following things would be very helpful:
- Licence guidelines
- A document describing the relationship of the APL to other licences. 
  (what's compatible, what's not and why)
- A list of approved products to be redistributable by Apache

What are your thoughts?

Jeremias Maerki

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to