www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Henri Yandell (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (LEGAL-289) ACE license
Date Wed, 08 Feb 2017 02:39:41 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-289?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15857265#comment-15857265
] 

Henri Yandell commented on LEGAL-289:
-------------------------------------

I'm confused - it feels like you're being arbitrary.

Our criteria says that licenses must meet the Open Source Definition to be in Category A (well,
it does lack the direct link that the Criteria directly relates to Category A). It doesn't
say that they must be on the OSI approved list. We can change it to say that, but we should
be reviewing the items on the Category A list as not all of them are OSI approved. 

Are we changing the Criteria to read "The license must be on the Open Source Initiative approved
license list"?

> ACE license
> -----------
>
>                 Key: LEGAL-289
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-289
>             Project: Legal Discuss
>          Issue Type: Question
>            Reporter: Anthony Baker
>
> The Apache Geode project would like to include ACE as a bundled dependency in a binary
convenience artifact.  Can you review the ACE license at http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~schmidt/ACE-copying.html?
 It looks somewhat BSD-ish to me.
> Should the referenced license be added to the list of approved licenses?
> http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved#category-a
> Thanks for the help!



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

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


Mime
View raw message