Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-xml-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 9429 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2004 01:45:25 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (208.185.179.12) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 7 Feb 2004 01:45:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 86303 invoked by uid 500); 7 Feb 2004 01:45:00 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-xml-general-archive@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 86256 invoked by uid 500); 7 Feb 2004 01:45:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: general@xml.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 86239 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2004 01:45:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail3.speakeasy.net) (216.254.0.203) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 7 Feb 2004 01:45:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 6227 invoked from network); 7 Feb 2004 01:45:07 -0000 Received: from dsl254-085-072.nyc1.dsl.speakeasy.net (HELO [192.168.254.4]) ([216.254.85.72]) (envelope-sender ) by mail3.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 7 Feb 2004 01:45:07 -0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: elharo@mail.ibiblio.org Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <4C2F1577F2EF2840A9AE9EC61860C881976499@usseex01.amer.bea.com> References: <4C2F1577F2EF2840A9AE9EC61860C881976499@usseex01.amer.bea.com> Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 20:38:08 -0500 To: general@xml.apache.org From: Elliotte Rusty Harold Subject: RE: Update to Version 2.0 license Cc: novalis@fsf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N At 4:29 PM -0800 2/6/04, Cliff Schmidt wrote: >As you suspected, you are misunderstanding. The same >rules apply about not having GPL (and LGPL in the case >of Java)-licensed source within CVS. The compatibility >referred to means that someone creating a derivative of >a GPL-licensed work can use code licensed under the >Apache License 2.0 to create that derived work. That's what the Apache foundation thinks. I asked the FSF about this yesterday, and they seem to think otherwise. Dave Turner, their GPL Compliance Engineer, told me in no uncertain language that the Apache 2.0 license is *not* compatible with the GPL. :-( It might behoove the Apache folks to confer with the FSF folks, and find out what the sticking point is. -- Elliotte Rusty Harold elharo@metalab.unc.edu Effective XML (Addison-Wesley, 2003) http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/effectivexml http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0321150406/ref%3Dnosim/cafeaulaitA --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org