geronimo-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From toby cabot <>
Subject Re: JavaWorld Article and Certification Claims
Date Tue, 14 Dec 2004 23:39:32 GMT
Jboss is licensed under the LGPL, and the LGPL is an OSI certified
license[1] as well as a Free Software license[2].  So while the term
"open source" means different things to different people I'd claim
that Jboss is "open source" using a very common definition of the


P.S. Does anyone else find this talk about corporations co-opting the
open source process to be ironic?  After all, the term "open source"
was invented to water down the idea of Free Software so it would be
more palatable to corporations.  And whether you prefer the LGPL or
the Apache License, it's a point of fact that the Apache License is
much more permissable than the LGPL is.  Let's say I'm a company and
I'd like to build a product around an open source application server.
Let's say that I'd prefer to take from the community but give nothing
back.  I'd be allowed to do that with an Apache-licensed project but
not an LGPL project, so which license protects the community better?

Note that I'm not advocating on behalf of either license, I think that
both are useful.  I'm just saying that the Apache license is much more
business-friendly than the LGPL (which is more business-friendly than
the GPL).


View raw message