openmeetings-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "" <>
Subject Re: Redistributing modified MIT licensed code (JavaScript library)
Date Thu, 01 Aug 2013 01:43:51 GMT
I am afraid some of our changes that are required for instance for making
it timezone safe will be much easier if we simply do it.
And also their use will be relatively limited to what we want to do with
it. So its unlikely that it will be useful for anybody else.

We can then discuss how and when those changes will become part of

For me it seems like the author of wicket-jquery-ui does not care about the
license at all. There is not even a License file or any kind of header in
the source code of his file.
So in theory that can literally mean that he can decide tomorrow he will
license it under whatever he wants it to be.

That is a bit scary for us. We can't just include a library without having
a correct attribution of the License.

I know there was put a bit of effort into using this library now, but if we
release it and there will be doubts raised about this it could mean we have
to replace the entire library.

Was anybody able to actively talk to the author of that wicket-jquery-ui ?
Cause if that guy does not respond to any emails its really kind of
dangerous to base our application on the hope he will not suddenly change
his mind and put the code under a license we don't like.


2013/8/1 Maxim Solodovnik <>

> Hello Sebastian!
> we actually do not distribute the fullcalendar.js.
> We are using wicket-jquery-ui which ships fullcalendar for as.
> Despite wicket-jquery-ui allows to replace almost any resource with custom
> one, I would start from proposing our patch to the author since it would be
> easier to maintain in the future. (Already was done with wicket-jquery-ui,
> wicket and some jquery libraries)
> On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 7:36 AM, <
> > wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > the OpenMeetings project would like to redistribute the jQuery Plugin
> > "Fullcalendar":
> >
> >
> > As part of its distribution. Which itself should not be a problem:
> >
> >
> > But we also might need to modify some of the source code to fit our
> needs.
> >
> > Are we allowed to do that?
> > Are there changes to NOTES files needed when we do that ?
> >
> > I've somebody knows an answer to that or pointers to the FAQ where this
> > would be covered, I would much appreciate.
> > But I think the FAQ don't cover that topic yet.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Sebastian
> > --
> > Sebastian Wagner
> >!/dead_lock
> >
> >
> >
> >
> --
> Maxim aka solomax

Sebastian Wagner!/dead_lock

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message