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]
