Date: 2004-11-15T14:22:14 Editor: HenriYandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Wiki: Jakarta Wiki Page: Using LGPL'd code URL: http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta/Using LGPL'd code
no comment New Page: = Using LGPL'd licensed works at Apache = == Can I use an LGPL'd licensed work at Apache? == No. == Please? == Nope. == Why not? == Basically, LGPL is a license written for the C programming language. While we all agree that its intent is to allow people to freely use the library, its wording means that the actual application to a language other than C is up for debate. A lot of this comes down to whether the term 'linking' means 'import' in Java or not. Early vs Late linking languages etc. Anyways, legal advice given to the ASF is to not to be tied to an LGPL license as the LGPL is feasibly as viral as GPL. This isn't just some NIH view the ASF have. Lawrence Rosen's latest book on open-source licensing seems to repeat the view. This means: * we cannot have LGPL'd jars in the CVS repository * that we cannot modify previously LGPL'd code * that we cannot import LGPL'd code in our import statements. The same applies for GPL. The only solutions are: * Ask the library to dual-license LGPL with something like BSD or ASF 2.0. * Make the LGPL-usage a plugin, and host the plugin outside of the ASF. The latter does mean that you are personally taking on the liability for the code; ie) you're now in the situation that the lawyers warn against. == This sucks == Yep. == Will this ever be resolved? == I'm hoping that as the months go by next year (2005) the board will have a method by which we'll be able to import LGPL'd code in our code. GPL will still be out of the question, as would LGPL in CVS or modifying LGPL; but use of Dumbster, JFreeCharts, Hibernate and other libraries would be possible. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
