www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Bagnara <b...@apache.org>
Subject Re: mx4j jar including javax.management... classes; activemq jar containing javax.management and javax.jms... classes - license question
Date Thu, 03 Dec 2009 14:21:02 GMT
2009/12/3 Paul Libbrecht <paul@activemath.org>:
> It would be the first time I see a "breakage" of the "package = origin"
> contract.
> Maybe a little note to the effect that it was rewritten in some "readmes" or
> "about" could help because I believe I am not the only one with such an
> assumption.

This is the default way we currently have multiple JVM
implementations, every JVM has its own implementation of
java.awt.Image or any other java.* javax.* class.

Speaking of non java and non w3c code, If you know slf4j then you will
know that every slf4j wrapper includes its own
org.slf4j.impl.StaticLoggerBinder class. In order to provide an
alternative implementation you have to write this class in the same

e.g: Sling has its own org.slf4j.impl.StaticLoggerBinder class:

This is something happening every time you have some alternative code
implementation and you don't want / can't rely on delegation.


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

View raw message