Sam Ruby wrote:
Sam,This issue has come up before. This time, let's flatten it.In two weeks, there is a board meeting. At that time, I would like to be able to report that the contents of the Maven repository conforms to the policies of the Apache Software Foundation. Code under the ASF License is clearly OK. As is the IBM Public License (the pre-Jakarta BSF, for example) and the MPL (Rhino). The following public domain components are also approved: Antlr and Doug Lea's concurrency package. Licenses clearly not conforming to the ASF's policies for distribution: LGPL, GPL, Sun's Binary Code License.
I am confused about the problem with licenses. I was hoping you could help clarify. Maven was designed so that it could use whatever repositories the user desires. The jars that Maven uses were purposely put on iblibo by people who use maven (not Apache itself) so we would not have to worry about license and distribution issues. Ibiblio is clearly ok with distributing files with gpl, lgpl and other licenses. It is the developer's responsibility to make sure it is compatabile with their product or code.
My question is: Why does Apache care what repository the user uses and what licenses are there? Apache has no jursidiction over ibiblio.
Cheers,
Dan Diephouse
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
