1 of 1 people found this helpful
I would be very interested in hearing why your legal department has decreed this. From my reading, the Apache license is an "attribution license" - as long as you acknowledge that you are using their code, you have fulfilled the requirements. So I fail to see why a LGPL-licenced product cannot contain an Apache-licensed component. (I can see, however, that it would not work the other way around.)
By the way, Tomcat (or JBoss Web Server) is not your biggest problem - JBoss AS also makes use of various other Apache components, such as commons logging.
I mis-spoke in my original email -- he's not actually a lawyer. Anyway this is his reply:
Oops; looks like I did not make enough of a distinction between the LGPL and the GPL!
The following para from http://www.apache.org/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html actually helps to make this distinction clearer: This licensing incompatibility applies *only* when some Apache project software becomes a derivative work of some GPLv3 software, because then [rest snipped].
Since the *LGPL* does not cause anything else to become a derived work, I see that they are compatible. Thank Peter Johnson for correcting me, please!
/me wonders why the fsf web pages only talk of "GPL-compatibility", and don't mention "LGPL-compatibility" anywhere at all... :-)