commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Luc Maisonobe <Luc.Maison...@free.fr>
Subject Re: [fileupload] please help on reviewing FILEUPLOAD-199
Date Wed, 13 Mar 2013 18:40:11 GMT
Le 13/03/2013 16:46, Simone Tripodi a écrit :
> Hi again Luc/all,
> 
> I just realised that our fellows of Apache Geronimo ship an ALv2.0
> version of javax.mail[1] - there should be any kind of issue on
> importing and adapting their source code, right?

Sure. It's much better this way.

Luc

> 
> TIA!
> -Simo
> 
> [1] http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-javamail_1.4_spec-1.4/src/main/java/javax/mail/internet/MimeUtility.java
> 
> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
> http://www.99soft.org/
> 
> 
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 4:13 PM, luc <luc@spaceroots.org> wrote:
>> Le 2013-03-12 11:15, Simone Tripodi a écrit :
>>>
>>> Hi all guys,
>>
>>
>> Hi Simone,
>>
>>
>>>
>>> due to FILEUPLOAD-199, I shaded 2 classes from javax.mail package to
>>> support RFC2047 header values, I kindly ask you a couple of feedbacks
>>> about:
>>>
>>>  * verify the shaded jar works in an integration test, if some of you
>>> has an application where experimenting the current SNAPSHOT;
>>>
>>>  * review the legals: I updated the LICENSE file in order to clarify
>>> that commons-fileupload ships the javax.mail external classes;
>>
>>
>> This should not be done in the LICENSE file but in the NOTICE file.
>>
>> Nevertheless, I don't think we can do that at all in this case. The classes
>> are subject to either GPL or CDDL license. We *cannot* ship anything
>> subject ot GPL license. so this would imply we should consider we got it
>> under
>> the terms of CDDL license. Looking at
>> <http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html#criteriaandcategories>,
>> we must "appropriately label" these parts, and they must be "For small
>> amounts of source that is directly consumed by the ASF product at runtime in
>> source form, and for which that source is unlikely to be changed anyway
>> (say, by virtue of being specified by a standard), this action is
>> sufficient." Here, the code has been modified, so I'm not sure we fulfill
>> the requirements.
>>
>> You should ask legal@, and during the time we wait for their advice, you
>> should *remove* this code from
>> our repository.
>>
>> best regards,
>> Luc
>>
>>>
>>> Please note that, when shading, I relocated the javax.mail classes
>>> under o.a.c.fileupload.utils.javax.mail package in order to avoid
>>> potential collisions in the classpath with javax.mail.* classes
>>> provided by the container where fileupload is deployed.
>>>
>>> Many thanks in advance, all the best!
>>> -Simo
>>>
>>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>>> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
>>> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
>>> http://www.99soft.org/
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> 
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org


Mime
View raw message