Done. r581354

On 02/10/2007, David Illsley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> John,
> A jar with known provenance seems like a good idea. I'm giving Axiom
> and Axis2 tests a go with the geronimo stax jar now. If they pass I'll
> commit the changes this evening.
> David
>
> On 02/10/2007, John Kaputin (gmail) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I have successfully compiled and tested Woden's OM implementation using the
> > StAX api jar from Apache Geronimo.  I'd like to know if Axiom could use this
> > jar file instead of the Codehaus stax-api-1.0.1.jar file. This would resolve
> > one remaining issue we have on the Woden incubator status file [1] about
> > verifying licenses for software included in the distribution. This change
> > would require a more thorough test of Axiom than my Woden-specific test.
> >
> > The remaining issue we have concerns the license file specified for the
> > Codehaus stax-api-1.0.1.jar file in the Axiom distribution.  Axiom specifies
> > the Apache 2.0 license, but we have not yet been able to determine with
> > certainty how the Axiom project came to use ASL 2.0 for this jar file.  ASL
> > 2.0 is not included in the original codehaus jar file and there's no
> > reference to ASL 2.0 on the StAX api project at the codehaus website.
> >
> > We did get some responses a while back saying that:
> > a) licensing of StAX is complicated
> > b) ASL 2.0 is the correct license (but without any explanation of why)
> > c) BEA is the only authorative source
> >
> > I think the simplest option is to use the Geronimo StAX API jar (with it's
> > ASL 2.0 license).  Alternatively, I'll have to try the legal-discuss list to
> > try to resolve the license question.
> >
> > [1] http://incubator.apache.org/projects/woden.html
> >
> > regards,
> > John Kaputin
> >
>
>
> --
> David Illsley - IBM Web Services Development
>


-- 
David Illsley - IBM Web Services Development

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to