Scott:

Your last statement describes my concern.  It should never be a
problem for the user or implementer.  It can be a problem but what I'm
saying is that it should not be.  People should be able to use open
source risk free.  It kills the Microsoft types.  If we could solve a
few small problems more would adopt the use of open source for solving
the true big problems in business.


David

On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Scott Battaglia
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Organizations that produce open-source software under a particular
> license should take care to ensure that any third-party
> libraries/software they utilize has a license that is compatible with
> the license that they are using.
>
> In fact libraries we use within CAS may not be the same license as CAS
> (though all of our source code uses the same license).
>
> An example of license compatibilities:
> http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/ (also, see the article posted
> before)
>
> -Scott
>
> -Scott Battaglia
> PGP Public Key Id: 0x383733AA
> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/scottbattaglia
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 3:07 PM, David Whitehurst
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Scott:
>>
>> Here's a good question.  Does one license truly cover CAS completely?
>>
>> E.g. I use software from all over and I'm looking for a Money.java
>> file.  The JDK has a Currency.java but money is the representation,
>> including the amount of that currency.  I find a really good
>> Money.java.  It uses Creative Commons and says that I must display the
>> license.  I can rename all the variables and write the entire
>> BigDecimal wrapper by hand and still copy it almost verbatim.  My
>> maven project uses the Apache license and I don't refer to the
>> Creative Commons one.  Do I have to create this mis-match of licenses
>> for this hacked up API or can I just have an open source license that
>> says you can use this, modify this, do what you will, but expect no
>> warranties?
>>
>> I see this all the time.  Can you say that no other license comes into
>> play except for the JA-SIG one?  There's not one piece of software
>> that doesn't say you "must" provide "this" license or copyright in any
>> of it?
>>
>> David
>>
>>
>> On 11/18/08, Scott Battaglia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 12:36 PM, David Whitehurst
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> > Benn:
>>> >
>>> > Also JBoss uses an End User License Agreement (EULA).  I think this is
>>> > a good idea especially for a "product".  Instead of a JA-SIG
>>> > stand-alone license, you could use a JA-SIG EULA for each product.
>>>
>>> I don't believe we'll be looking to EULA's considering most people hate 
>>> them!:
>>> http://xkcd.org/501/
>>>
>>> ;-)
>>>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > David
>>> >
>>> > On 11/18/08, David Whitehurst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> >> Benn:
>>> >>
>>> >> This is so crazy!  Let me share a situation I am dealing with now.  I
>>> >> am contracted for organization A to create enterprise architecture.
>>> >> Organization B has more political clout so they force an Oracle
>>> >> solution (identity management) on me for one specific application
>>> >> suite.  The Oracle solution uses it's own licence but tests their
>>> >> product on version 2.0.52 for Apache.  We use and have accepted
>>> >> version 2.2.8 of Apache.  This is just one of the constraints.  So,
>>> >> now my enterprise solution, using JBoss and the LGPL (includes all
>>> >> these licenses) must be run on an IIS Windows server using a terminal
>>> >> window to start and stop JBoss.  They won't buy an NT Service wrapper.
>>> >>
>>> >> My issue as an evangelist and integrator of open source, is that the
>>> >> licenses cause lots of confusion.  People choose them incorrectly.
>>> >> Or, they choose "something".  Or they ignore them altogether.  For
>>> >> CAS, I would use a GNU license and maybe the LGPL.  I think at least
>>> >> there's strong legal intelligence behind it.  And, I think that the
>>> >> goal is to let us write and share software to be able to communicate
>>> >> with computers in the most effective manner.  And, by sharing what we
>>> >> learn, things only get better.  We've already made the wheel.  We
>>> >> should use it.
>>> >>
>>> >> I'm anxious to see what license is chosen.  I'm starting a non-profit
>>> >> organization and some open source projects with another friend and we
>>> >> haven't chosen a license.  We will model the organization much like
>>> >> Apache but somewhat custom.  I've been leaning towards the GNU
>>> >> licenses.  And, our stuff won't be an Apache product so why associate
>>> >> with Apache.  I think the license should support the goal and I
>>> >> haven't hired a lawyer for this task yet.  When I ultimately do loose
>>> >> the cash for the lawyer, I'll share anything I find with all my
>>> >> partners in crime.
>>> >>
>>> >> Please post here with any news.
>>> >>
>>> >> David
>>> >>
>>> >> On 11/18/08, Benn Oshrin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> >> > --On November 18, 2008 8:37:16 AM -0500 Scott Battaglia
>>> >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> > ] We're looking at a license that provides more protection for
>>> >> > ] contributors and adapters.  I'm not actually on the working group
>>> >> > ] looking into this, but I trust their judgment ;-)
>>> >> >
>>> >> > ] On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 2:55 AM, Olivier Berger
>>> >> > ] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> > ] > Just out of curiosity, what's the rationale for change from BSD to
>>> >> > ] > Apache2 ?
>>> >> >
>>> >> > In addition to the protection issue, there is also concern about 
>>> >> > license
>>> >> > alignment with other open-source higher ed oriented projects.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > One of the questions that has come up is whether or not GPL style 
>>> >> > copyleft
>>> >> > should be included.  I'd be interested to hear if anybody has any 
>>> >> > strong
>>> >> > opinions for or against, off list if you prefer.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > -Benn-
>>> >> > _______________________________________________
>>> >> > cas-dev mailing list
>>> >> > [email protected]
>>> >> > http://tp.its.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/cas-dev
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > cas-dev mailing list
>>> > [email protected]
>>> > http://tp.its.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/cas-dev
>>> >
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> cas-dev mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://tp.its.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/cas-dev
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cas-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://tp.its.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/cas-dev
>>
> _______________________________________________
> cas-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://tp.its.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/cas-dev
>
_______________________________________________
cas-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://tp.its.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/cas-dev

Reply via email to