Hello, You maybe missed the two responses already to the email, since by default responses only go the the user list not back to the individual. See the archived responses here: https://lists.apache.org/thread/zg01tkq8wtmym27q3dolcg1msbtoxoxl
Mike McCandless http://blog.mikemccandless.com On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 8:52 AM external-opensource-requests(mailer list) <external-opensource-reque...@cisco.com.invalid> wrote: > Hi Team > > Hope all is well. > Just touching base for a quick update on the previous mail. > > > Appreciate your help on this. > > Thanks, > Open Source Request Team > > From: external-opensource-requests(mailer list) > Sent: 21 March 2023 07:42 PM > To: 'java-user@lucene.apache.org' <java-user@lucene.apache.org> > Subject: Info required on licensing of Lucene component > > Hello Team > > I hope you are doing well!! > > This is regarding Lucene component licensing. > The maven repo link > https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.lucene/lucene-queries/4.10.4 > for lucene-queries 4.10.4 shows Apache 2.0 license associated with the > component. > Also, the archive (lucene-queries-4.10.4-sources.jar) uploaded has a > LICENSE.txt file which has Apache 2.0 license, but it also includes a > NOTICE.txt file which shows JUnit (junit-4.10) licensed under the Common > Public License v. 1.0. But there is no code associated with Junit included > in the source archive (lucene-queries-4.10.4-sources.jar) file. > > In this case, since Common Public License 1.0 is more restrictive compared > to Apache 2.0, for our better understanding, can you clarify to us on what > is the actual Open Source license associated with the Lucene component? > > Mentioning just two of the lucene components in mail as example for your > reference "lucene-backward-codecs 9.3.0" > https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.lucene/lucene-backward-codecs/9.3.0 > > Looking forward to your reply. > > > Thanks , > Open Source Request Team > >
