I've used this as reference previously: http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#prohibited
Specifically this sentence: "...For example, using a GPL'ed tool during the build is OK." That would suggest that using GPL tools for build and test should be okay. I'll let others address the distribution of optional components question in great detail. My sense is this is primarily focused on how "optional" the undistributable component is. On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 12:56 AM, Markus Geiß <markus.ge...@live.de> wrote: > Hey all, > > We've started a thread at our dev list and forgot to send it to the > general incubator list too. > Any opinion is appreciated, you can find the original message below. > > Best, > > Markus > > .::YAGNI likes a DRY KISS::. > > > From: markus.ge...@live.de > > To: d...@fineract.incubator.apache.org > > Subject: [DISCUSSION] How to deal with runtime dependencies > > Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2016 14:12:04 +0100 > > > > Hey all, > > > > hope this finds you well. > > > > I thought instead of discussing this on top of pull request, because it > is more > > than just the JDBC driver, it is the right time to create a new thread. > > > > We are currently using MySQL's Connector/J and Hibernate's EntityManager > at > > runtime as the JDBC driver and JPA implementation. Our source code is not > > depending on both. > > > > It would create a huge effort to replace both for test and production > environments. > > > > The questions is: > > > > Would it be compliant with the license policies if we omit them for our > source > > release, but keeping them for our own integration tests. > > > > If somebody is creating a deployable distribution, the expectation is > that whomever > > is creating the distribution can decide what he wants to use. > > > > Best, > > > > Markus > > > > .::YAGNI likes a DRY KISS::. >
