cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ralph Goers <Ralph.Go...@digitalinsight.com>
Subject RE: Using Maven (or something similar) for dependencies? (Was: Co coon's Rhino+continuations fork)
Date Fri, 12 Mar 2004 15:56:26 GMT

Geoff,

I totally agree with the statements you are making below.  While I have no
problem with blocks that are clearly marked as having redistribution
licensing problems being part of Cocoon, the core components MUST not have
this problem.  Even moving flow to a block will not change it from being a
core component because so many other blocks are tying into it.  So this kind
of "tying" must be done very carefully and judiciously in my opinion.

While I am all in favor of using Maven, or some tool like it, to manage
dependencies, I really don't see how that has anything to do with licensing.
Whether Cocoon is pre-packaged at cocoon.apache.org, or the end-user has to
build it at their site, it really makes no difference.  If a Cocoon customer
cannot add on whatever value they choose and then distribute their product
with Cocoon included, this is a violation of the Apache license, at least in
spirit.

Ralph 

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Geoff Howard [mailto:cocoon@leverageweb.com] 
Sent:	Friday, March 12, 2004 5:08 AM
To:	dev@cocoon.apache.org
Subject:	Re: Using Maven (or something similar) for dependencies?
(Was: Cocoon's Rhino+continuations fork)

> Well, AFAIU they will only run into the same legal hassle if
> they try to *redistribute* cocoon as a whole!! So no problem
> for the simple user.


Is a company using Cocoon to deliver web applications redistributing 
Cocoon? (yes, I think).  Then from what I can tell, a good portion of 
even our own committers, not to mention people on the users list would 
have a problem.

> If it's really a problem for the ones distributing is still
> the question anyway (I doubt it) But this way it's not the
> ASF that would have to take the responsibility for that.
>
> I guess that's the point


Yes, that's the point indeed.  ASL is supposed to be a business-friendly 
license.  If Cocoon uses distribution-time tricks to technically comply 
with the ASL but in the process nullifies its intent for some users, we 
have failed IMO.

Geoff

Mime
View raw message