cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Andrew Stevens" <at...@hotmail.com>
Subject RE: (Re)Licensing question
Date Tue, 10 Jan 2006 17:22:59 GMT
>From: Helma van der Linden <h.vanderlinden@mi.unimaas.nl>
>Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 17:31:25 +0100
>
>Guys,
>
>I usually keep away from licensing issues, but this time I'd like to know 
>if it is done correctly. I'm looking at a project that is made up of 
>several other open source projects, cocoon is one of them, another 
>(sub)project is licensed under BSD.
>
>This project is licensed under GPL. It doesn't say that only their part is 
>GPL and others are licensed differently. Looks like they included the 
>entire Cocoon source tree with licensing files for all external jars used 
>and they also left in the ASF license headers in the various files.
>
>Is this correct?

Given that GNU [1] list the Apache licenses as "GPL-Incompatible, Free 
Software Licenses", I've always interpreted that to mean that you can't link 
to (i.e. make use of) Apache-licensed libraries (jars) in a project that 
you're releasing under the GPL.  They don't appear to have an equivalent 
list for LGPL compatibility, unfortunately.
I do recall that previous discussions on this list have stated that 
Apache-hosted projects aren't allowed to [L]GPL libraries in their CVS 
repositories.

If I've got this all backwards, someone please let me know; I've a project 
of my own [2] that I would have licensed under GPL if not for the fact that 
I made use of libraries that were released under Apache and BSD licenses.  
Instead I went for LGPL on the grounds that I can find a lot of other LGPL'd 
projects that use the same libraries, so it looks like that's okay...


Andrew.

[1] http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLIncompatibleLicenses
[2] http://pseudoq.sourceforge.net/



Mime
View raw message