Andrus Adamchik wrote:
> (oops, just used the wrong 'From' ... twice... so other two copies of
> this message sits in the moderation queue)
>
>
> So as a practical matter I can recommend the JPF project programmers to
>
> * either use dual licensing. But then I can't give them any good
> examples of other open source projects following this path, so they
> may be reluctant to go with it;
There is at least one project i know of which uses dial licensing:
http://woodstox.codehaus.org/FAQ#FAQ-3.1Licensing
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
>
> * or switch to another license that would satisfy both (L)GPL and
> Apache downstream users. If I understand correctly, a revised BSD
> license [1], [2] satisfies this requirement, so it looks like the best
> bet.
>
> Thanks
> Andrus
>
>
>
> On Mar 10, 2007, at 6:05 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
>
>> Per quoted message, there is an LGPL'd framework whose developers are
>> very open to change licensing to make it both LGPL and Apache
>> friendly. Any advice we can give them on dual licensing?
>>
>> Also we had a discussion with this project in the past, and there was
>> a message [1] that I thought was simply FUD, about (L)GPL frameworks
>> not being able to include Apache code. Can somebody please clarify
>> whether this is true?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Andrus
>>
>>
>> [1] http://sourceforge.net/forum/message.php?msg_id=3834911
>>
>>
>> Begin forwarded message:
>>> From: Ahmed Mohombe <amohombe@yahoo.com>
>>> Date: March 10, 2007 5:49:40 PM GMT+02:00
>>> To: dev@cayenne.apache.org
>>> Subject: CMr - Plug-in engine discussion on javalobby!
>>> Reply-To: dev@cayenne.apache.org
>>>
>>> Just saw there's still some discussion about JPF licensing on
>>> javalobby:
>>> http://www.javalobby.org/thread.jspa?threadID=91097
>>>
>>> could someone(who knows the licensing details) please answer the
>>> "dual license question"?
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance,
>>>
>>> Ahmed.
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
>> only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
>> constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
>> and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
>> official ASF policies and documents.
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
> only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
> constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
> and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
> official ASF policies and documents.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
|