-
1. Re: Licensing issue LGPL vs. Apache?
jbalunas Feb 4, 2010 9:28 AM (in response to agez)I just wanted to let you know we are reviewing this, but we do not think there is an issue here. Stay tuned for more "official" word :-) -
2. Re: Licensing issue LGPL vs. Apache?
agez Feb 4, 2010 9:50 AM (in response to jbalunas)great, thanks for the feedback! -
3. Re: Licensing issue LGPL vs. Apache?
jbalunas Feb 5, 2010 2:09 PM (in response to agez)1 of 1 people found this helpfulThe more "official" response:
The question seems to be whether there is a licensing problem in
RichFaces because, while much of the code is specifically licensed
under LGPL version 2.1, there is also some code which calls Xalan API,
that is licensed under the Apache License 2.0. It is important to
note that there are no files in the RichFaces source that
individually contain both Apache-licensed code and LGPL-licensed
code.It is true that the Apache License 2.0 conflicts with *GPL* version
2 (not GPL version 3, or code licensed as "GPLv2 or later"), though
we think the main problem there is the upstream indemnification
clause in the Apache License and not the patent-related clauses.
However, we interpret LGPL version 2.1 in such a way that the same
license conflict would only arise if an individual .java or .class
file were made up of or derived from both LGPL-licensed and
Apache-licensed copyrightable code. Otherwise, Java projects may
contain both Apache-licensed code and LGPL-licensed code without
conflict. That is, the scope of the LGPL extends only to individual
files, and not to larger works, unlike the GPL. In this respect,
our interpretation of the LGPL treats it similarly to licenses like
the Mozilla Public License and the Eclipse Public License. Indeed,
many other JBoss projects contain both LGPL-licensed code and
Apache-licensed code. We believe that our interpretation of the LGPL
is consistent with the prevailing longstanding interpretation in the
open source community, particularly in Java contexts.Hope this helps :-)
-Jay
-
4. Re: Licensing issue LGPL vs. Apache?
agez Feb 8, 2010 4:30 AM (in response to jbalunas)Thanks a lot. I think these are some good arguments. Let's see what they say ;-)
Cheers,
Helmut