cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeremias Maerki <...@jeremias-maerki.ch>
Subject Re: Rhino (once more)
Date Fri, 27 Oct 2006 15:22:51 GMT
Ok, but you guys still need to fix:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/cocoon/branches/BRANCH_2_1_X/legal/rhino1.5r4-continuations-R26.jar.license.txt
and
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/cocoon/trunk/commons/legal/src/main/resources/rhino-1.6R2.jar.license.txt

And does the user get an notification when Rhino is downloaded through
Maven as required by http://people.apache.org/~cliffs/3party.html#options-inproduct?

On 27.10.2006 17:11:24 Ralph Goers wrote:
> This may not be too big a deal for Cocoon trunk.  So long as flowscript 
> is an optional part of Cocoon I believe we are OK.  However, it probably 
> also means that while other blocks can take advantage of flowscript they 
> shouldn't rely on it.
> 
> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> > Hi Cocooners
> >
> > Before I start: Sorry to be a PITA to bring up Rhino again. ;-)
> >
> > Batik is starting to plan a new release and Rhino popped up in the back
> > of my mind. I went looking in your codebase to see what you did with
> > Rhino since I last checked. Turns out that Cocoon still lists Rhino as
> > under the MPL 1.1 in both Trunk and the 2.1.x branch. And that's clearly
> > wrong:
> > http://www.mozilla.org/rhino/download.html
> > http://lxr.mozilla.org/mozilla/source/js/rhino/src/org/mozilla/javascript/Script.java
> >
> > And as you know this whole thing is further complicated by the fact that
> > the NPL is currently de-facto an excluded license which means that
> > neither Cocoon nor Batik are allowed to distribute or simply download 
> > (through Maven without alerting the user) Rhino.
> > http://people.apache.org/~cliffs/3party.html#transition-examples-npl
> >
> > Means both our projects would actually have to remove Rhino and make
> > sure they run without it.
> > http://people.apache.org/~cliffs/3party.html#options
> >
> > Cliff wrote about certain options in March on legal-discuss (Message-ID:
> > <c5e632550603241427y1e563dbdh9b0507a7ddfe9b5a@mail.gmail.com>). Nobody
> > followed up on that. And it looks like both our projects have ignored
> > the third-party licence policy so far concerning this issue. Any ideas
> > how to proceed? Shall we raise it again on legal-discuss? Has there been
> > any progress in trying to convinve the Rhino project to switch to the
> > MPL?
> >
> > Jeremias Maerki
> >
> >   



Jeremias Maerki


Mime
View raw message