Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-esme-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: (qmail 58752 invoked from network); 29 Jan 2010 11:10:31 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 29 Jan 2010 11:10:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 78693 invoked by uid 500); 29 Jan 2010 11:10:31 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-esme-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 78653 invoked by uid 500); 29 Jan 2010 11:10:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact esme-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: esme-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list esme-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 78643 invoked by uid 99); 29 Jan 2010 11:10:31 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:10:31 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2000.0 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [140.211.11.9] (HELO minotaur.apache.org) (140.211.11.9) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:10:29 +0000 Received: (qmail 58613 invoked by uid 99); 29 Jan 2010 11:10:07 -0000 Received: from localhost.apache.org (HELO mail-fx0-f228.google.com) (127.0.0.1) (smtp-auth username bdelacretaz, mechanism plain) by minotaur.apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:10:07 +0000 Received: by fxm28 with SMTP id 28so1899752fxm.20 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 03:10:05 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.75.66 with SMTP id x2mr636424faj.7.1264763405156; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 03:10:05 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <58E57892-DAA4-4C97-81D4-E5B6F5567A0A@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 12:10:05 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: LGPL code in ESME (was: ESME-47 "Some Licensing Nits" ...) From: Bertrand Delacretaz To: esme-dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Hi, On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 11:28 AM, Richard Hirsch wrote: > ...maven-based solution might be more useful... If what you mean is maven automatically downloading GPL/LGPL stuff at build time, that's not ok. Unless there's a big prominent warning that people cannot miss, and then only if those components are optional. The key is that whatever is required to use what we release (which is source code - binary releases are a convenience only) must have an acceptable license according to http://apache.org/legal/resolved.html This is just to clarify for everybody, I don't mean you're doing things wrong ;-) -Bertrand