camel-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Willem Jiang <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Components relying on commercial software
Date Fri, 22 Jul 2011 02:26:46 GMT
On 7/22/11 6:20 AM, Richard Kettelerij wrote:
> Hi
> As we all know Camel has many components [1] and as such depends on a large
> number of (third party) libraries. Occasionally community members are
> requesting new components or are willing to donate components they have
> developed themselves. Usually the question emerges where to host these new
> components. This is largely governed by the (third party) libraries used by
> the component and the licences of these libraries. The options are roughly:
> 1) 3rd party library is open source under ASL compatible licence (ASL, BSD,
> MIT, etc): host at Apache.
> 2) 3rd party library is open source under non-ASL compatible licence (GPL,
> LGPL, AGPL, etc): host at Apache Extras / Camel Extras.
> 3) 3rd party library is open source and best maintained outside of Camel:
> host at 3rd party project (like Smooks, Activiti, Drools)
> 4) 3rd party library is not open source,
> it's proprietary / commercial software: ???????
> What's your opinion in case of situation 4? Examples where this situation
> applies are [2] en [3].

I think for the [2],[3] Apache Extras could be a good place, as most 
Camel Extas were move there.

For [4], if the component is not open source, we could not host it in 
Apache Extras either. But the component can be shipped with the 
commerical softer ware, as the ASL doesn't forbit that.

> Regards,
> Richard
> [1]
> [2]
> [3]

Blog: (English)
Twitter: willemjiang
Weibo: willemjiang

View raw message