incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Robert Burrell Donkin <robertburrelldon...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Is the JRE license OK for inclusing in AOO?
Date Thu, 20 Oct 2011 20:03:04 GMT
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
<dennis.hamilton@acm.org> wrote:

<snip>

> It is not clear to me that either of those bundlings in binary releases is
> explicitly tolerated by the information that is provided at
> <http://apache.org/legal/resolved.html>.  There seems to be no help in the
> older draft either: <http://apache.org/legal/3party.html>.  I also note that
> if one is bundling the JVM or building Windows distributions, there are
> library dependencies and API dependencies too, somewhere deep in the works.
> (The LibreOffice folk have apparently stopped any JVM bundling but I don't
> know what they do about Microsoft redistributables.)
>
> It seems that there is more that needs to be said about binary releases and
> how non-source, restrictive-license redistributables are incorporated in those
> releases to satisfy installation requirements and also provide run-time
> services to an Apache release.  I thought I saw how that was tolerable so long
> as no source was provided and the redistribution terms were honored, NOTICE
> was provided, etc.  I can't find anything clear-cut on looking again.

IIRC Apache has historically strongly disliked but tolerated releases
containing non-open-source but appropriately redistributable
artifacts. When there is no clear consensus, there will be no clear
policy.

Would any of the open source options for executing Java code (Harmony,
OpenJDK, etc) work?

Robert

Mime
View raw message