geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James Strachan <>
Subject Re: Status of JMS
Date Thu, 06 Nov 2003 16:49:47 GMT

On 6 Nov 2003, at 16:12, Jeremy Boynes wrote:

>> From: Keith Visco []
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 8:44 PM
>> Hi Jeremy,
>> Jeremy Boynes wrote:
>>> I believe OpenJMS is compatible in binary form, but source
>> suffers from the
>>> Intalio indemnity problem.
>> What is the "Intalio indemnity problem"? As far as I know, OpenJMS 
>> uses
>> the Exolab license, which is a BSD-like license. The only restriction 
>> on
>> re-distributing the source code is that you must leave the original
>> copyright notice in the source file, and a copy of the exolab must
>> accompany the source code. So basically, you can't just go and change
>> the copyright and call it your own. But you are allowed to
>> use/modify/redistribute, etc. There is no requirement of having to use
>> the Exolab license for your own code.
>> So I'm not sure what the problem is with that, perhaps you can explain
>> further, or perhaps I have missed the point. Of course, I'm not a
>> lawyer, nor am I an expert in licensing issues. However, after working
>> with that license for the past 4 years, I am confused on what the
>> problem you are facing over the license is.
> I was not involved in them, but as I understand it there have been 
> prior
> conversations between ASF and Intalio/Exolab regarding the use and
> redistribution of Exolab licensed software by the ASF. As a result of 
> those
> conversations, it was believed that Intalio would require some form of
> 'click-through' agreement that indemnified them from harm, or something
> similarly legal. The ASF was not in a position to meet Intalio's
> requirements.
> As you, and others, have pointed out, none of this is indicated by the
> Exolab license, so I am not sure if this is a legal issue or ASF simply
> wishing to honour Intalio's intentions. A comment from someone 
> involved in
> those original discussions would certainly help clarify this.
> Currently Geronimo is operating on the premise we cannot re-use Exolab
> licensed code, which means we are missing out on some of the best 
> technology
> available. If we are working under a misconception and would be able to
> freely use, modify and redistribute code from projects like OpenJMS and
> OpenORB, we would like to know.

We could use binaries AFAIK - I think the issue was about hosting 
exolab source code at Apache wasn't it? Provided we don't host any 
exolab licenced code at Apache we'd be fine (i.e. just use binaries).


View raw message