Working towards our release. One of our dependencies was licensed LGPL, which the ASF does not view as compatible with ASLv2. Last year I corresponded with the author of that dependency; per the email chain below you can see that he has agreed to dual-license his code under both LGPL and ASLv2.
Since his website has not been updated, I'm forwarding this correspondence to this list in order that it can be referenced in the archives. (His email is freely available on the web, so I haven't bothered to obscure it). Dan ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Sergey Ilinsky <[email protected]> Date: 14 October 2010 10:11 Subject: Re: XmlHttpRequest licensing To: [email protected] OK. I confirm that I now dual license my XMLHttpRequest.js library (available at the http://code.google.com/p/xmlhttprequest/) under both the Apache License 2.0 and the LGPL. Sergey/ On 14 October 2010 00:04, Dan Haywood <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Sergey, > Yes, sorry to be creating this hassle for you. Answers within. > > > On 13/10/2010 22:04, Sergey Ilinsky wrote: > > Could you tell me directly: > 1) what license will work for your project > > The most straightforward is Apache's own, ie: Apache License 2.0. There's > more discussion of other valid licenses at [1] > > > 2) if the license attribution provided in writing in email is sufficient > > Yes it is. You could simply say: > > *I confirm that I now license my XMLHttpRequest.js library (available at > the http://code.google.com/p/xmlhttprequest/) under the Apache License 2.0 > * > or you could say (if you didn't want to be bothered updating your website): > > *I confirm that I now **dual license my XMLHttpRequest.js library > (available at the http://code.google.com/p/xmlhttprequest/) under both the > Apache License 2.0 and the LGPL. > * > > Hope that helps, I appreciate your time. > Dan > > [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-a. > >
