Thx Jia.
Then it falls under optional use
https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#optional
Which is totally fine.
On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 6:50 PM Jia Yu wrote:
> Thank you, Felix. I will use the WIP disclaimer.
>
> To answer Jim's question, GeoTools components use different licenses:
>
Thank you, Felix. I will use the WIP disclaimer.
To answer Jim's question, GeoTools components use different licenses:
https://docs.geotools.org/latest/userguide/welcome/license.html
GT-main uses BSD, so its binary can be included in Sedona's release.
Other components in GeoTools use LGPL, but
On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 6:03 PM Felix Cheung wrote:
> I’d strongly recommend the community to move towards the first release
> with the WIP disclaimer
>
> https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#work_in_progress_disclaimer
>
>
I’d strongly recommend the community to move towards the first release with
the WIP disclaimer
https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#work_in_progress_disclaimer
https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#releases
As for the LGPL dependency specifically, a replacement will
Hi all,
Has the fact that one of the dependencies is LGPL (GeoTools) been
discussed / addressed? (See
https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x)
I'm asking since I don't know if the ASF has any recommended work
arounds for shipping code with licenses that it does not approve
