---- Paul Libbrecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ---- > I think it is immensely important for anyone receiving these APIs to be aware of: > - the license for each (among others, the, possibly limited, rights to redistribute) > - cleanly defined authorship and origin
I agree; I thought they were pretty clear in the xml-commons repository, which is where we store copies of DOM/SAX/JAXP code. http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/xml-commons/README.txt?rev=HEAD&content-type=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup I know that xml-xalan includes the various LICENSE.sax.txt, etc. files in it's distribution as well; I'm not sure about xml-xerces. Note that the subject of packaging of .jars was already voted on in this community and the (fairly) clear decision was to have a single .jar file, in our case named xml-apis.jar. And don't worry about DOM Level 1 - xml-commons has never shipped only that, and I'm pretty sure all current and recent xml.apache.org projects all use DOM L2. And I'm certainly not a lawyer, but there is an implementation of the javax.xml.* packages checked into xml-commons CVS tree with the clear Apache license in each source file; it was a bunch of Sun committers who checked them in. Of course exactly what sorts of public 'official' releases the ASF can now make of JSR-supported software is a separate question... ===== - Shane <eof .sig="'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in a very scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less'" "Oohayu oyod?!"=gis. /> __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/
