On Jun 1, 2007, at 1:29 PM, Andrew Petro wrote: > I see two needs of an opensource project respecting the licenses of > its dependencies. > > One is to actually comply with the terms of those licenses, which > often includes a requirement of acknowledgement and inclusion of > the license under which the dependency is used in and redistributed > with the project. > > Two is to document this compliance in such a way that one can be > reasonably confident in it and that it is maintainable. > > For example, it might technically be sufficient for license X to > appear somewhere in the project and to ship Jar Y which is > available under license X. It's still desirable to articulate that > that's what we're doing, otherwise over and over again people will > have to wonder about whether and how we're shipping Jar Y.
Moving this to uportal-dev... Hmmm... biggest license compliance question for me is whether it's legit to bundle GPL jars (Apache doesn't -- our license looks a lot like theirs). Does Maven get us around this (since we're not redistributing the artifacts?) Jason -- Jason Shao Application Developer Rutgers University, Office of Instructional & Research Technology v. 732-445-8726 | f. 732-445-5539 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http:// jay.shao.org -- Join your friends and colleagues at JA-SIG with Altitude: June 24-27, 2007 in Denver, CO USA. Featuring keynotes by: Phil Windley, Matt Raible, Matt Asay Sessions on topics including: CAS, uPortal, Portlets, Sakai, Identity Management, and Open Source For more information & registration visit: http://www.ja-sig.org/conferences/07summer/index.html --- You are currently subscribed to [email protected] as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
