logging-log4j-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Yoav Shapira <yo...@apache.org>
Subject Re: LGPL ok?
Date Thu, 01 Sep 2005 22:21:46 GMT
Hi,
Don't do it.  It's a long discussion still under way, a topic of heavy debate,
but the safe answer is don't do it.  You can join legal-discuss for specifics. 
If the dependency is optional, i.e. the program will build and run without the
LGPL code, and you specify the LGPL code in the NOTICE file, then maybe, but
basically still no.  And you need to run it past legal-discuss anyways, just to
be safe.

Often, the quicker route will be to ask the LGPL code owner to relicense, or to
contribute his/her code to the ASF, or to rewrite the relevant parts of the
code yourself and license it under AL2.

Yoav

--- Scott Deboy <sdeboy@comotivsystems.com> wrote:

> Could someone explain ASF's stance on inclusion of LGPL-dependent code
> in our repository and distributions?  I thought I recalled it was
> currently not allowed (only code dependent on Apache/BSD/MIT licenses
> could be included).
> 
> I was just curious if it would be ok to include the irc receiver in
> Chainsaw, since it relies on an LGPL-licensed library, and possibly
> include the library itself in the Web Start download.
> 
> Would be handy to be add a menu item to 'chat with log4j developers',
> etc.
> 
> Scott
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
> 
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org


Mime
View raw message