harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Leo Simons <m...@leosimons.com>
Subject Re: The Unofficial "Harmony, Licensing, the Universe and everything" FAQ
Date Mon, 14 Nov 2005 18:31:12 GMT
IANAL.

On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 09:34:17AM -0800, Neil Macneale wrote:
> Are the licenses in question so restrictive that that they would prevent
> someone from writing a script which would download all the required
> packages and assemble them correctly on the installer's computer? For
> example, if some entity were to determine that component ABC v1.2.3 in
> combination with component XYZ v 3.2.1 would combine to satisfy some
> useful functionality, then is there any legal reason for them to
> distribute a script which downloads the parts and puts them together?
> The script could request that the user agree to each license as well.
> 
> If we restrict ABC and XYZ to be licensed under some sort of "free
> license," is there any legal reason preventing someone from doing this?
> I'm not suggesting this is what harmony should do, but more trying to
> get at the core of the issue.

No, such an installer script is I believe perfectly okay. Its what every
linux distribution out there does to some extent. I think setups like that
can, do and should exist (for example Fedora Core ships gcj, classpath,
ant, tomcat, etc, and they all work together properly).

AIUI you can't call it java though.

Writing that script at apache might also be violating apache's policies and
philosophy.

The core of this is that the GPL is "distribution oriented", which means you
can do lots of stuff as long as you don't redistribute.

I think.

Leo


Mime
View raw message