forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ross Gardler <>
Subject Re: plugins with some excluded licenses
Date Tue, 11 Jul 2006 11:43:39 GMT
Cliff Schmidt wrote:
> On Jul 10, 2006, at 4:34 PM, Cliff Schmidt wrote:
>> I give you the long answer for two reasons: a) to give you an  
>> understanding for the ideas behind all those rules, and b)  to make  
>> sure I'm not misleading anyone into thinking that distributing an  
>> LGPL library within an Apache product would cause us to all go to  FSF 
>> jail (or worse, JBoss jail!).  The reason we don't distribute  LGPL 
>> jars in our products is because our users have come to  associate the 
>> Apache brand with (among other things) commercially- friendly 
>> software, and the LGPL places restrictions on how they can  license 
>> software that links to the library, which most would  consider not as 
>> friendly as they would like.
> Actually, there was another reason I gave the long answer: I'm always  
> looking for feedback from people on this policy.  When it's simply a  
> matter of the legality of a particular action, I can usually make  that 
> decision easily enough on my own (and with the help of our  generous pro 
> bono lawyers); but when it's an issue of figuring out  the right policy 
> for Apache, I really want as much feedback as possible.
> I hate to think that this policy would risk dividing a development  
> community unless absolutely necessary.  So, if any of you have  thoughts 
> on the utility/importance of drawing lines to ensure that  the Apache 
> brand has some well-defined licensing definition (such as  I've tried to 
> do with this policy to create something that is  "commercially 
> friendly"), please let me know.  I'm don't want to  hijack the 
> short-term issue, but I want everyone to know the big  picture and that 
> I'm always open to hearing potentially better ideas.

Since it is I who has the "problem" with the LGPL libraries I ought to 
state my opinion.

I fully understand the intent of this policy.

I fully support the intent of this policy.

I do not believe that our proposed solution will divide the community 
since we will only be providing the binary download from a third party 
distribution site.

Cliff, thanks for all your efforts in formulating a clear policy for us 
to follow. It makes life much easier.


View raw message