ant-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Thompson <andr...@quidnunc.com>
Subject RE: enhydra make and xmlc tasks
Date Wed, 22 Nov 2000 19:43:34 GMT
> At the time, I had heard that there were some issues with 
> APL/GPL/LGPL,
> so I asked him if this was an issue. He stated that the gnu.regexp
> classes were LGPL so he thought there was no problem. I wasn't so sure
> and asked the list (and Duncan) for clarification. I didn't get much
> feedback.
> 

OK, the GPL makes very well known provisions about having to make all
distrubted changes to a piece of code also available under the GPL. It also
requires that all code that *links to*  (which in Java effectively means
"uses in any way") be "free software" - which 95% of the time means it must
also be GPL'd.

LGPL is almost exactly the same, except it removes the linking part. Anyone
is free to call the code that is LGPL'd regardless of how their code is
licensed (anything from GPL to $1,0)0,000 dollars a seat is fine).

So from the point of view of something like ANT - if a task where to be
LGPL'd I'd think that was fine - any changes made to that task would have to
be released under the LGPL, but it wouldn't be breaking the terms of the
license to use it - nor could it somehow infect ant unless you did something
really stupid like steal parts of it and use it elsewhere in ant, but that
isn't going to happen...

Only thing is copyright assignment, but that's a problem anyway, even if
you've been ignoring it. I assume ant is under the Apache license... do
contributors retain copyright under this license. 

Andrew Thompson    :: A little bigger on the inside
Software Developer :: Quidnunc
I am the cat who walks through walls, all places and all times are alike to
me.


Mime
View raw message