As you suspected, you are misunderstanding. The same rules apply about not having GPL (and LGPL in the case of Java)-licensed source within CVS. The compatibility referred to means that someone creating a derivative of a GPL-licensed work can use code licensed under the Apache License 2.0 to create that derived work.
That's what the Apache foundation thinks. I asked the FSF about this yesterday, and they seem to think otherwise. Dave Turner, their GPL Compliance Engineer, told me in no uncertain language that the Apache 2.0 license is *not* compatible with the GPL. :-( It might behoove the Apache folks to confer with the FSF folks, and find out what the sticking point is.
--
Elliotte Rusty Harold [EMAIL PROTECTED] Effective XML (Addison-Wesley, 2003) http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/effectivexml http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0321150406/ref%3Dnosim/cafeaulaitA
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
