On 15.06.2012 20:19, Les Hazlewood wrote:
> I didn't even think about this when I created the initial project. I > just defaulted to Apache 2.0 because I do this for all of my projects. > Apache 2.0 (for better or worse) is almost universally accepted in > legal departments for organizations and corporations worldwide as it is > the most understood. It is very 'business friendly', so almost all > organizations can use it, which is best for adoption. > > For example, one of my (minor) gripes with Logback is that I can't use > it in Apache Shiro for test cases because of the LGPL license. If it > were Apache 2.0 licensed, I could have used it. Instead I'm stuck with > Log4J for my tests. Granted, this is a minor point for Shiro, but it > serves as an example of how adoption can be affected. > Hi Les, I know you are busy elsewhere, so thank you for taking the time to post. I would like to keep the discussion on project organization separate from the question of which license to use (Apache/EPL/LGPL) for logback. I'll answer your post on project organization in a separate email. You can use logback in Apache Shiro! Logback is dual licensed under LGPL and EPL. The latter is a "Category B: Reciprocal License" in Apache terminology. According to Apache's Third-Party Licensing Policy [1], EPLed software can be consumed by Apache projects. Apache Jackrabbit does, and given the people involved, it is not for lack of knowledge about licensing issues. Or am I missing something? [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html -- Ceki http://twitter.com/#!/ceki _______________________________________________ logback-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.qos.ch/mailman/listinfo/logback-dev
