activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Claus Ibsen <>
Subject Re: [REPORT] Apache ActiveMQ - October 2011
Date Mon, 17 Oct 2011 06:36:06 GMT
Just an additional note about the LGPL from my point of view, as you
may wonder if there is a problem in Apache Camel also.

In the Camel PMC we have discussed and looked into this. I have put
the Camel PMC mail on CC on this mail.

It's not an issue with the Apache Camel releases as we do not include
the LGPL binaries in the releases.

The issue was because ActiveMQ included the Camel web-console (eg a
WAR file) in the distribution, and the camel-web console
included some jruby LGPL JAR files.

The Apache Camel distribution (eg the ZIP / tarball) have never (to my
knowledge) included the Camel web-console (eg a WAR file).
People had to build or download (from Maven) the console if they
wanted to use it.

There is a pre-build Camel web-console (eg the WAR file) in the Maven
Central repo though, but its my understanding that this is outside of

The camel-web console have from Camel 2.5.0 onwards been refactored to
use Scalete as web framework, and the LGPL JARs
is no longer in use.

On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 1:09 AM, Hiram Chirino <> wrote:
> Community:
>  * The development and user lists continue to stay active.
>  * No new committers or PMC members added.
> Development:
>  * A LGPL licensed artifact was discovered to be in a Apache Camel
> dependency which was included in the ActiveMQ 5.4.0, 5.4.1, 5.4.2 and
> 5.5.0 releases.  We have removed the release from the Apache download
> server and released ActiveMQ 5.4.3 and 5.5.1 with the artifacts
> removed.
>  * ActiveMQ 5.6 is about to be released.
>  * Apollo 1.0 is approaching completion. Several betas have been
> released and it has shown to be stable and easy to manage.  The Apollo
> messaging engine will likely be the path used to implement ActiveMQ
> 6.0.
> Trademark / Branding Status:
>  * The and TLD's are owned by other entities
>  * Need to investiate if we should be using (R) instead of (TM) for
> the ActiveMQ mark
>  * Sub-projects need to be reviewed to make sure they are also compliant
>  * Documentation and readme files will also be reviewed for compliance
> Releases:
>  * Apache ActiveMQ 5.5.1
>  * Apache ActiveMQ 5.4.3
>  * Apache Apollo 1.0 beta 5
>  * Apache ActiveIO 3.1.3
> Regards,
> Hiram
> FuseSource
> Web:

Claus Ibsen
Twitter: davsclaus, fusenews
Author of Camel in Action:

View raw message