geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <...@jagunet.com>
Subject Re: Réf. : [ObjectWeb architecture] Re: ObjectWeb (was Re: ASM looks cool but LGPL)
Date Wed, 03 Sep 2003 13:56:09 GMT
On Wednesday, September 3, 2003, at 08:46  AM, 
Jean-Pierre.Laisne@bull.net wrote:

>
> So let me ask a question:
> In your  schema, would it be acceptable for this "gateway license" to 
> be a
> BSD license?

Yes, most assuredly!

> Could we imagine that some JOnAS components would become BSD (so 
> reusable
> within any other licensed code - even proprietary) while JOnAS  would 
> stay
> LGPL?
>
> Whatever the answer is, be assured that we will do our best to find a 
> way
> of sharing code which respects everybody's will and interest.
>
>

That sounds good as well...

Although not exactly on-topic for *this* discussion, the
below I think would be useful to state:

The only aspect to keep in mind is that any ASF code (ie: any
s/w of the ASF) must be "unattached". For example, if an
ASF s/w product *requires* a 3rd party module/component/library/whatever
that restricts the usage or availability of the ASF product in
such a way that it disallows that product from being used in
the spirit of the Apache license, then it cannot be an ASF
product.

For example, the ASF produces 'Foo' which is worthless and useless
without 'Bar'. 'Bar' is GPL or closed-source. No alternatives
exist for 'Bar'. Then 'Foo' would be rejected as an ASF
product because it would prevent 3rd parties from taking
'Foo' and using it however they want (if 'Bar' was GPL, for
example, then the so-called "viral" nature would apply; or
if 'Bar' was closed source and required someone to purchase
it to use it)

--Signed Muddy Waters


Mime
View raw message