geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Daniel S. Haischt">
Subject Re: ObjectWeb (was Re: ASM looks cool but LGPL)
Date Thu, 28 Aug 2003 12:36:51 GMT

is it up to a particular ObjectWeb software project team to
decide whether they want to re-release their software under
a new or dual license or will the ObjectWeb group work on
a strategy on how it would be possible to 'enabling its (ASF's)
projects to use some OW code'?

i for instance am interested in the JORAM JMS server [1] because
that project implements the JMS v1.1 API and because it now ships
with that nifty kJORAM J2ME library which enables people not to rely
on the commercial iBuss//Mobile software [2].

just out of curiosity - why was the JORAM project moved from
a CPL license to LGPL?


daniel s. haischt



Jeff Mesnil wrote:
> (given the subject, I crosspost to ObjectWeb architecture mailing list)
> Daniel S. Haischt wrote:
>> James Strachan wrote:
>>> Just to be clear - we cannot touch any LGPL code at Apache so that 
>>> rules out ASM for now.
>> yes, that was my distinct understanding!
>> i just wanted to explain that i do not think that the
>> ObjectWeb group will release ASM under a BSD kinda
>> license.
> There have been some talks within ObjectWeb community to see
> how we (the OW community) can collaborate more with Apache and Geronimo.
> License is one of the main issues what we have to solve but I do believe
> that we can find a good solution for both Apache and ObjectWeb.
> After all, lots of OW projects already use some Apache code.
> Why not thank Apache back by enabling its projects to use some OW code?
> ObjectWeb and Apache have some complementary projects and I personally
> think that both community can benefit from better cooperation.
> ASM would be a good start.
> So the licensing issue is open but OW community is carefully
> considering it.
> jeff

View raw message