felix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Upayavira ...@odoko.co.uk>
Subject Re: Should I move JMood to the trunk?
Date Fri, 01 Sep 2006 13:46:03 GMT
stephane.frenot@insa-lyon.fr wrote:
> Actually I have a smarter solution, 
> those libraries are dynamically downloaded in the Console (thanks to
> OSGi :).
> So I can remove the tab without problem and make it available from my
> site as it was before. 
> The only issue is that the tab is not hosted at apache svn.

Sounds good. Thanks for this. Note, this will need to be done before the
incubator PMC vote which'll happen in maybe 1 week's time. :-(

Regards, Upayavira

> /stephane
> On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 09:28:46AM -0400, Richard S. Hall wrote:
>> stephane.frenot@insa-lyon.fr wrote:
>>> On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 02:20:36PM +0100, Upayavira wrote:
>>>> Niclas Hedhman wrote:
>>>>> On Friday 01 September 2006 16:58, santillan wrote:
>>>>>> Just a note: while JMood's initial version was LGPL'd, a software
>>>>>> was
>>>>>> given to the ASF and the JMood code in the trunk is properly ASL'd.
>>>>>> Moreover, I've removed the dependency to MX4J just in case (as it
>>>>>> easy
>>>>>> to refactor), so currently only depends on osgi.core, osgi.compendium,

>>>>>> the
>>>>>> framework and Junit, so no licensing problems here :-)
>>>>> Cool. So we are discussing a hypothetical case ;o)
>>>> Well, the issue that remains is how we use jfree and jcommon, both of
>>>> which are, as I understand it, Jmood dependencies, and both are LGPL.
>>> Not Jmood, but MOSGi dependencies.
>> Yes, people seemed to have gotten lost. :-)
>> Well, the way I see it, if we cannot find compatible graphing libraries, 
>> then we can either remove the component and Stephane can host it 
>> separately (perhaps at Source Forge) or we can create some sort of 
>> bridging and make it optional somehow. Stephane probably knows what 
>> makes the most sense.
>> -> richard

View raw message