The 4-clause BSD license does not seem to appear on http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html at all. So I think you need to go to legal.
I confess that I don't understand the problem with JSP pages in the first place. All the pieces you need are either Apache or Eclipse in my experience. On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 6:52 AM, Andy Seaborne <a...@apache.org> wrote: > Dear Mentors (mainly), > > Before going to legal@ or LEGAL-, I'd like to get advice about this license. > The objective is to redistribute the binary in the Fuseki server jar. > > The server jar is a single jar of all the binaries combined. You can run > Fuseki with "java -jar OneJar". So it's unpacking the original binary and > repacking in a combined jar. > > Question: is it worth even pursuing this route? > > > The license is at: > > http://freemarker.sourceforge.net/docs/app_license.html > > it is BSD...ish. It has 4 clauses: > > 1 - the BSD clause about source code distribution. > > 2 - The binary redistribution clause is replaced by one needing either > acknowledge in end-user documention or acknowledgement "in the software in > the normal place" > > 3 - No endorsement by using the name FreeMarker. > > 4 - Name protection clause. > > Their copyright date is out of date :-) They released in 2011. > > Andy > > > PS > Plan B1 is use Velocity but that seems to need an external file and has > issues with unnecessary dependencies. > > Plan B2 is to use StringTemplate which is 3-clause BSD. But it's not quite > up to date in maven central (4.0.2 vs 4.0.5). > > Velocity : I didn't find out how to control velocity without an external > file like tools.xml; to use velocity-tools I either ended up with a lot of > extra stuff, or had to tune the maven excludes to avoid pulling in struts > (this is fixed in Velocity tools 2.1 but it's not out yet and Fuseki needs > non-snapshots to release with). I may revisit this if I have time.
