Re: Update to Version 2.0 license

[Berin Lautenbach]

Must admit, my understanding was the same as Cliff's.  I might just ask 
the question on this and see what we get.

Cheers,
        Berin
Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:

At 4:29 PM -0800 2/6/04, Cliff Schmidt wrote:

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.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]