Hi Dirk, To the best of my knowledge, here's the status of Xerces Java:
>junit . 3.7 . > xml-cocoon2 xml-security xml-xerces JUnit is under the IBM Public License. To my thoroughly un-lawyerly understanding, this license allows redistribution in binary or source form. Since we're distributing only binaries, it doesn't even oblige us to distribute the license, so long as the license we're distributed under conforms to certain minimum provisions. Looks to me like the Apache public license conforms to those provisions--so we should be set even as things stand--though no doubt including a copy of that license can't hurt. A more legally-informed opinion much appreciated! >optional . > xml-xerces >From what I can tell--and I had nothing to do with adding this jar!--this is just Ant in disguise. Hence there's no problem. But, since we're also not using this "optional" jar in any way, there's no need either; I'll make sure this gets whacked as soon as Xerces-J 2.0.0 comes out (should be later tonight...) >xerces . 1.4.4 3.1 4.4.1 That's us. :-) What's the deal with these version numbers though? 1.4.4 exists but neither of the others do. >ant 3 1.1 4_1 . 1 1.4.1 . > xml-cocoon2 xml-fop xml-xalan xml-xalan xml-xerces In our case, that is indeed Jakarta ant. >style-apachexml . > xml-xerces This was in Xerces-J 1; gone from Xerces-J 2. But it was a set of of our own stylesheets, so is no problem. >xalan 2.0.1 . . . 2.0.1 > xml-batik xml-stylebook xml-xerces xml-xerces xml-xindice That's xalan. stylebook-1.0-b2 That's Apache's stylebook. So I think Xerces-J is all right; we've got some clean-up to do but there should be no serious issues here. Cheers, Neil --------------------------------------------------------------------- In case of troubles, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
