geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James Strachan <>
Subject Re: [JavaMail] concerns
Date Tue, 19 Aug 2003 15:52:35 GMT

On Tuesday, August 19, 2003, at 01:21  pm, Danny Angus wrote:

> James,
>> Danny, I took a quick look at the JavaMail licence and its pretty huge
>> and I"m not too hot at reading big complex licences full of legal
>> speak. Could we redistribute Sun's JavaMail API in binary form as part
>> of the Geronimo project? If so could we also put the jar in the Maven
>> repository to avoid painful user-intervention to get Geronimo to 
>> build?
>> (i.e. so that the build process of Geronimo could auto-download Sun's
>> JavaMail API?).
>> If we can do the above then I agree creating a clone of the JavaMail
>> API with the various required implementation code to conform to the 
>> API
>> might not be a good idea - we might as well just use Sun's API distro.
>> I guess it depends on how we're allowed to reuse Sun's API distro.
> We've had this issue in James, it is part of the wider and longer 
> running
> "jars in cvs" debate so familiar to jakarta participants, and the 
> conclusion
> of our investigation of JavaMail was that it is acceptable to 
> distribute it
> as part of a binary, which we do. If we couldn't I expect James would 
> also
> be looking to create an ASFL-friendly JavaMail alternative.
> However we're not allowed to put it in CVS, and in fact thats pretty 
> much
> the case for all 3rd party jars, because it is difficult (read 
> impossible)
> to ensure that people can't download them without first agreeing to 
> their
> licence conditions.
> I understand that this is because "viewcvs" provides access to the jar
> without compelling people to also download any other files, never mind
> actually read the licence.
> Someone, who deserves more credit than my forgetting who it was, 
> produced
> ant tasks for james which allow james' build to include a step which
> automatically retrieves JavaMail, Activation and JUnit jars from their
> respective homes, and compels the user to agree to accept the licence.
> This is AFAIK allowable (or acceptable to Sun) under the licence.
> The result is that the first time you build James you have to accept 
> these
> licences, and the jars are downloaded for you.
> Thereafter the build is indistinguishable from the process having the 
> jars
> available from cvs, and the built binaries are distributable.
> As both James and Geronimo use JavaMail as it is intended and for the
> purpose it was written I don't see why our (Geronimo's) use of it 
> should be
> restricted by the licence, in exactly the same manner as Tomcat's 
> "normal"
> use of the Servlet API is not restricted by it's licence.

Do we have confirmation from Sun that this is acceptable yet? If so we 
can use the Maven plugin for this...


View raw message