On 20/05/07, Oleg Kalnichevski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, 2007-05-20 at 17:11 +0100, sebb wrote:
> On 20/05/07, Roland Weber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi Oleg, Sebastian, all,
> >
> > > I _personally_ find the requirement of conditional compilation of LGPL
> > > dependent code too restrictive and complicating the release process,
> >
> > I agree, in particular if that should mean we can't release binaries
> > with NTLM support built in. But the conditional compilation is a
> > _Jakarta_ policy, not an Apache one. Let's see where we are a year
> > from now.
> >
> > sebb wrote:
> > > Quote:
> > >
> > > "Therefore, LGPL v2.1-licensed works must not be included in Apache
> > > products, although they may be listed as system requirements or
> > > distributed elsewhere as optional works."
> > >
> > > Seems to me that it should not be too difficult to make JCIFS an
> > > optional work.
> >
> > As I understand it, optional work would refer to hosting a separate
> > project elsewhere and using the LGPL for that. HttpAuth-NTLM or such.
>
> AIUI, it's not necessary to create an independent external project to
> merely to wrap libraries that cannot be included in distributions.
>
> For example, JMeter depends optionally on JavaMail - it will work
> without it, but some functions are disabled.
>
Sebastian,
The main sticking point is whether we are allowed to ship code that
imports LGPL licensed classes as a part of the main binary distribution
or the users will have to download the source distribution, rebuild the
whole damn thing with --allow-some-lgpl-stuff flag or some such in order
to enable an optional feature. If latter is the case I _personally_ see
the whole LGPL policy pointless and would rather favor hosting JCIFS
dependent code outside ASF.
As far as I know, it's much the same for LGPL as for JavaMail.
One cannot include the library, but can call it.
See the link I quoted:
"Scenarios Involving Prohibited Works
...
YOU MAY include code within the Apache product necessary to achieve
compatibility with a prohibited work through the use of API calls,
"bridge code", or protocols ..."
Is that not possible here?
S
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
