incubator-graffito-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From St├ęphane Croisier <>
Subject Re: Why not using Magnolia
Date Fri, 18 Mar 2005 12:53:31 GMT
At 13:16 18/03/2005, you wrote:
>Actually, this may change soon, provided the LGPL-based project is willing 
>to provide a "clarification of intent" like Hibernate which clearly states 
>how they see the LGPL apply in the java context.
>IMO, there are better LGPL-alike licenses that can non-ambigously
>be applied in the java world (like the Mozilla MPL) but each project
>should chose what suits them best. AFAIK, MPL dependencies are OK.

There was such a debate in the Jakarta General mailing list this fall about 

But AFAIK the situation has not changed. The LGPL is unclear. The ASF waits 
that the FSF clarifies the situation and the FSF will not move (at least 
the launch of the revised GPL version planned for this year I believe).

Finally, a "clean" dependency on Hibernate with some abstraction layers, 
why not (exactly what we contributed in Jackrabbit with an Hibernate and an 
OJB persistance layer implementation. Users have the choice to use either a 
full BSD like license stuff or to take the risk to use Hibernate. But as a 
company you can based your choice on some LGPL "interpretations" published 
on a web site (and a web page is so easily modified, especially with a CMS 
;-) )... so the original LGPL text is the key.

>All code hosted by the ASF needs to be Apache licensed but we can have
>dependencies on external code that have compatible licenses even if they 
>are not ASL.

If they are smoothly coupled yes (cf the example above for the peristence 
layer of Jackrabbit) but in the case of a CMS/Portal integration, can we 
really speak of loosely coupled link?

But there is an easy solution to this problem: Why Magnolia does not change 
its license from LGPL to ASL? ;-)


View raw message