All,
I think you'll find the specific case of syntax highlighter was
discussed very recently on legal-discuss.
Cheers,
Brett
On 19/08/2008, at 3:58 AM, Craig L Russell wrote:
Hi Les,
This is a question for infra, not just for the jsecurity team.
I'm copying infra on this thread so they can offer their opinions.
The web site is part of Apache, but it's not a "release" of Apache
code the way a downloadable source or binary release is a "release"
of Apache code.
I believe that if you propose to use some LGPL code to make the web
site easier to use, there will not be any objection, but it's best
to ask in case there are any questions by the infra team whose
responsibility is to keep Apache running. Infra might have some
questions about the code that go beyond the license.
Craig
On Aug 18, 2008, at 10:46 AM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
Hrm. I see that syntaxhighlighter is LGPL. Are we allowed to
_use_ LGPL
code in the public website even though we're not using it our actual
software?
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 1:42 PM, Les Hazlewood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Another question - with the exported website, could we install our
own CSS
and JavaScript libraries?
For example, I came across this (
http://code.google.com/p/syntaxhighlighter/) a while back and
think it is
just awesome. I want to use it on the quickstart/sample pages to
make
things look nicer. Can we do that with an exported site? (I'm
trying to
learn what we are capable of or perhaps limited to).
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 1:39 PM, Les Hazlewood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Ah, ok, awesome. Thanks for clarifying Craig!
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 1:24 PM, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>wrote:
I think perhaps there is a misunderstanding.
You can link to the exported version of the wiki, to any page
that is
part of the project's web site. No problem. The exported version
has been
transformed into html.
The dynamic part of the wiki is generated each time the page is
referenced, so having external links to it is a resource problem
for Apache.
Call it weird rules, but all you need to do is to use the
exported URL
prefix instead of the dynamic URL prefix. The dynamic URL prefix
isn't even
visible to visitors or users of the exported site. It's only
known to the
folks on the project.
Craig
On Aug 18, 2008, at 10:13 AM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
The big notice at the top of this page:
http://cwiki.apache.org/CWIKI/
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 1:05 PM, Alan D. Cabrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Aug 18, 2008, at 9:45 AM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
I think my current preference is the manually maintained one.
I rarely
update the JSecurity website today, and do so only for the
occasional
announcement and product release - something that would still
be easy
to
do
in a manually maintained site environment (e.g. checked in to
SVN).
For
some reason, I just don't feel CWIKI is flexible or
configuable enough
for
our needs, and the "no linking to the wiki" rule really rubs
me the
wrong
way. I don't like that anyone visiting our website would
have to know
to
adhere to weird linking rules - its just not in the spirit of
the web
and
could be confusing for some people.
I have no preferences but, I have a few questions. What part
of CWIKI
is
not configurable enough for our needs? What is this "no
linking to the
wiki"
rule?
Regards,
Alan
Craig L Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
Craig L Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
--
Brett Porter
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
