www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "John D. Ament (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Created] (LEGAL-280) Can java based projects broadly have optional modules with Cat X dependencies?
Date Tue, 08 Nov 2016 19:54:58 GMT
John D. Ament created LEGAL-280:

             Summary: Can java based projects broadly have optional modules with Cat X dependencies?
                 Key: LEGAL-280
                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-280
             Project: Legal Discuss
          Issue Type: Question
            Reporter: John D. Ament

This is a follow up to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-198 where we introduce
that Amazon License is OK if its an optional dependency.

Does this apply to anything in Cat-X or specifically to those under field of use restrictions
or specifically to the Amazon License?

This probably is limited to java/jvm projects, where its an optional feature (e.g. the library
still works without it or has an alternative that can be dropped in instead) that is included
in a convenience binary.  To build the optional module from source, you would need to have
the LGPL library available locally in binary form (I would imagine).

- Java projects like this are not directly distributing the LGPL dependency
- They may use build tools, or provide other such means, to download these software (e.g.
its clear to the user)
- Its dynamically linked, by definition.  E.g. we wouldn't produce an "uber jar" or anything
that in some way bundled the extra dependency in a way that was non-obvious to the user
- I'm assuming this precludes modifications to the 3rd party library, since those couldn't
be licensed under ALv2

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

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

View raw message