[jlavezzo]

jaikiran pai wrote:

henk de boer wrote:

Jaikirian, do you know why there is a loggin and terms and conditions for downloading the source archive at jboss.org/jbossas/downloads?

I hadn't noticed that, but I think it's just an oversight. I'll check with those who might know more.

That EAP 6.1 Final is on the AS downloads page and is LGPL but unlike all the AS downloads requires a subscription agreement FEELS like either an "oversight" or a bait-and-switch.

[henk53]

Jeff, the EAP 6.1 Final binary requires a subscription, this is definitely not an oversight, but is explicitly intended.

What IS an oversight is that the source code of EAP 6.1 also requires a subscription if downloaded from the main download page. This is an oversight and wrong (the LGPL doesn't allow this).

[sheriel]

Could we consider to make a "community" build of the JBOSS EAP 6.1, and possibly of the next releases, removing all RedHat trademarks, using all the modified dependencies from the Jboss Maven Repository, to reprodice as much as possible the same original EAP 6.1 binary only without trademarks, and to share this outcome with the community, on this site?

Does anyone of you think that this could be usefull? I think so.

Otherwise, could someone among the most experienced try this on his own and then write a brief guide about how to configure the build environment to successfully build the LGPL free of use EAP sources (clarifying the needed build script changes, dependencies retrieval, etc...)?

Thanks for your attention.

[fcorneli]

Maybe better to ask the Free Software Foundation instead of RedHat about this, since the software is licensed under their license, and not a RedHat one.

[navneet7293]

Could someone confirm if these terms and conditions about using jboss at production are still applicable. This thread dates back to about 4 years now, so I just wanted to know if Jboss has changed its terms, because even the link posted in the reply by Jason Greene is broken. Thanks in Advance Jason Greene's Blog