www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ceki Gulcu <c...@qos.ch>
Subject Re: Move log4cplus' license to ASL 2.0.
Date Mon, 10 Aug 2009 13:51:10 GMT

Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> Ceki Gulcu wrote:
> it took a lot of time and effort but AL2.0 and GPL3 settled the
> remaining licensing issues

Really? Does this mean that GPL3 and AL2.0 are compatible?

>> The naming restrictions the FSF brings up with respect to the ASL are
>> not a big deal and with no practical incidence. Similarly, the objections
>> the ASF has about the LGPL (but not the GPL) are equally unimportant,
>> again with no practical incidence.
> these problems arose from the poor wording of the original LGPL. the ASF
> just decided to accepted and abide by the FSF's reading of that license
> (as applied to java code).

I agree that the LGPL is indeed poorly worded and difficult to
understand. It would have been very constructive if the ASF had
engaged the FSF in order to influence the wording of LGPL to be more
palatable. On the other hand, it's not ASF's job to debug the LGPL.


Ceki Gülcü
Logback: The reliable, generic, fast and flexible logging framework for Java.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org

View raw message