felix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff McAffer <Jeff_McAf...@ca.ibm.com>
Subject Re: Fixed bug in class loading
Date Thu, 13 Apr 2006 18:51:34 GMT
I'm not a lawyer so will neither wrestle or argue legal points.  Some 
non-legal points

- Signing will make changing JARs problematic. 
- Updates also will force you to retweak. 
- If the JARs are delivered as part of something else you may not have a 
chance to modify
- User permissions on the machine may not allow for modification (we have 
scenarios where we run off CDs and don't use any local storage)


Rob Walker <robw@ascert.com> 
04/13/2006 11:47 AM
Please respond to

Jeff McAffer/Ottawa/IBM@IBMCA
Re: Fixed bug in class loading

Does anyone have a real example where a commercial software vendor has 
actually refused to allow someone to adjust the bundle Manifest of their 
licensed bundle so that it would work better in an OSGi environment?

As a commercial software vendor, I can quite honestly say:

    * We include numerous 3rd party JARs, some commercial, in our OSGi
      bundle set and in no case has any software vendor refused to allow
      us to change or add to their manifest even if their license did
      not explicitly grant this right
    * Frankly we could care less if someone wants to modify bundle
      manifests of any of our JARs, even if doing so is against the
      letter of our license. As long as they are making legal use of our
      software, and paying us any requisite fee we're happy to have them
      as a customer. Ok, if their changes break something we might not
      cover helping them fix it under standard support - but aside from
      this, the widest possible legal use of our software is fine with us.

Simply changing a manifest (esp. the import / export parts) may not be 
strictly legal - but I suspect most vendors won't object if you explain 
your needs and ask for permission. You wouldn't be getting any usage or 
redistribution rights out of doing so, but you'd be making use of their 
software which is what most vendors want!


-- Rob

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message