cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Leo Sutic" <>
Subject RE: cvs commit: xml-cocoon2 LISCENSE.resolver
Date Tue, 09 Oct 2001 07:54:31 GMT
Sam, Berin,

I think the only way to avoid devloving into an IANAL discussion is to ask
Sun. Does any of you have the authority to talk to Sun on behalf of ASF?

Arguments for, that I can come up with:

 - resolver.jar *is* distributed along with our Programs. The fact that it
is available separately via CVS is irrelevant, as one can open, for example
ZIP files directly in IE and thus even if Cocoon was only distributed as a
.zip file one could get at individual files. I believe the same case can be
made for CVS.

 - The alternative is to include a note saying that one should download
resolver.jar separately from Sun's website. This is, however, against the
spirit of Sun's licensing. I know that the spirit doesn't matter in court,
but when talking to Sun...

 - "Do you want every Apache project to re-implement it?" I think not.

As I see it, we have nothing to lose on talking to Sun. We can not do the
"let's not alert them and see how much we can get away with". If they say
that we can't have resolver.jar in our CVS, then we'll have to re-implement
it - which we would have to do anyway.

Maybe talk to Norman Walsh as well. He is a staff engineer at Sun and while
he can't assume any responsibility for legal issues regarding licensing,
maybe he can help make the point.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sam Ruby []
> Sent: den 8 oktober 2001 21:59
> To:
> Subject: Re: cvs commit: xml-cocoon2 LISCENSE.resolver
> > bloritsch    01/10/08 12:35:16
> >
> >  Added:       .        LISCENSE.resolver
> >  Log:
> >  Comply with license restrictions on resolver.jar
> >
> >  Revision  Changes    Path
> >  1.2       +153 -0    xml-cocoon2/LISCENSE.resolver
> I am of the opinion that checking this license in alone does not bring the
> ASF into compliance.  As this jar is downloadable separately via
>, we are not
> complying with the clause that requires that it be "only distributed
> bundled as a part of your Programs".
> - Sam Ruby
> P.S.  License is mispelled in the name of the file.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, email:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, email:

View raw message