www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mohammad Nour El-Din <nour.moham...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [jira] [Commented] (LEGAL-81) Is it ok/meaningful to have a dependency licensed as ASL just for Apache Software Foundation, but LGPL for anyone else?
Date Mon, 30 May 2011 16:02:43 GMT
Hi All...

   For the issue mentioned below, would it be OK and acceptable to use
that library if the developer of [1] filed a SGA [2] with ASF ?.
Looking forward to your reply.

[1] - http://code.google.com/p/xmlhttprequest/
[2] - http://www.apache.org/licenses/#grants

On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Mohammad Nour (JIRA) <jira@apache.org> wrote:
>
>    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-81?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13036093#comment-13036093
]
>
> Mohammad Nour commented on LEGAL-81:
> ------------------------------------
>
> Now Sergey has sent us an e-mail confirming that he agrees on dual licensing his code
under both ASL v2.0 additionally to LGPL. Now the question is:
>
> Is that enough ? Or we need to do a more formal action like make him sign some paper
work for example ?
>
> Notice that he didn't update his site [1] yet to reflect that information.
>
> [1] - http://code.google.com/p/xmlhttprequest/
>
>> Is it ok/meaningful to have a dependency licensed as ASL just for Apache Software
Foundation, but LGPL for anyone else?
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>                 Key: LEGAL-81
>>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-81
>>             Project: Legal Discuss
>>          Issue Type: Question
>>            Reporter: Dan Haywood
>>
>> We are in the process of setting up Apache Isis into the incubator (the code prior
to Apache being called the Naked Objects Framework and sister projects).
>> I've now realized that one of the modules has a small dependency on code that has
an LGPL license (a small Javascript file) that would be part of the distribution.  Since
my understanding was that LGPL is not ASL 2 compatible, I contacted the developer about whether
he might consider moving to ASL.  His response was to grant permission as follows:
>> -begin-
>> Yes, I authorize "NO framework and your sister projects accepted  [2] into the Apache
incubator" to use my XMLHttpRequest.js library (available at the http://code.google.com/p/xmlhttprequest/
 and currently licensed under LGPL) with the ASL license.
>> [2] http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IsisProposal.
>> -end-
>> So, my question is: is this sufficient for us?
>> Many thanks,
>> Dan Haywood
>
> --
> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>
>



-- 
Thanks
- Mohammad Nour
  Author of (WebSphere Application Server Community Edition 2.0 User Guide)
  http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/abstracts/sg247585.html
- LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/mnour
- Blog: http://tadabborat.blogspot.com
----
"Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving"
- Albert Einstein

"Writing clean code is what you must do in order to call yourself a
professional. There is no reasonable excuse for doing anything less
than your best."
- Clean Code: A Handbook of Agile Software Craftsmanship

"Stay hungry, stay foolish."
- Steve Jobs

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


Mime
View raw message