forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ross Gardler <>
Subject CPL license and Apache (was Re: Eclipse plugin roadmap)
Date Sat, 31 Jul 2004 10:20:53 GMT
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> David Crossley wrote:
>> Ross Gardler wrote:
> ...
>>> I've removed the items now anyway. Thanks for the heads up.
>> However they are still in the SVN history.
>> Nicola Ken, do you know if we need to go in the back
>> door and completely remove such things?
> It must be done by infrastructure, and they have to keep history in 
> place anyway. BTW, I haven't checked if the license is *really* 
> incompatible.

I just read the license again. Not really got time to look into it 
moreright now, but it is still my understanding that it is compatible - 
but I am not a lawyer and my word cannot be final. Full text of license 
is at, but perhaps more 
important is the following FAQ entry (from

"If I write a module to add to a Program licensed under the CPL and 
distribute the object code of the module along with the rest of the
Program, must I make the source code to my module available in 
accordance with the terms of the CPL?

No, as long as the module is not a derivative work of the Program. "

This is about using a module within a CPL licensed programme rather than 
a CPL module in another product, but I think it still applies.

The other FAQ entry that was referred to previously in this thread was:

"Does the CPL allow me to take the Source Code for a Program licensed 
under it and include all or part of it in another program licensed under 
the GNU General Public License (GPL), Berkeley Software Distribution 
(BSD) license or other Open Source license?

No. Only the owner of software can decide whether and how to license it 
to others. Contributors to a Program licensed under the CPL understand 
that source code for the Program will be made available under the terms 
of the CPL. Unless you are the owner of the software or have received 
permission from the owner, you are not authorized to apply the terms of 
another license to the Program by including it in a program licensed 
under another Open Source license. By the way, the same answer applies 
if you want to include source code licensed under another Open Source 
license in a program licensed under the CPL.  "

This clearly states that we canot relicense, but I do not see that it 
precludes credited inclusion, furthermore we are not talking about 
software source code here. This is a couple of graphics images, which 
are treated as compiled code I beleive.


View raw message