You do win.. You don't have to have the direct implementation in apache cvs and ask if the eg gpl'ed software would include an implementation of that in their distro's. (who doesn't want an ant task for use with their software) Another thing that can be done (and is GPL legal so to say) is make an exception for certain projects. That has to be stated in the license however, which in my opinion is even better and this way the implementation can live in cvs. So the project concerning can just add "Apache Ant can make direct use of our library without having to redistribute their code under the terms of section 6" (quoting Roy on the last part). (read the complete gpl pages a couple of days ago and above seems possible)
Maybe Roy can comment on above however. If we can have one way to approach these kinds of siutation (eg always ask for exclusing of terms 6 in the license) and if not look for an alternative approach, that would make it a very clear way of doing things and make sure Apache doesn't get in legal trouble. Mvgr, Martin "I am public domain and compatible with apache" > -----Original Message----- > From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 09:35 > To: community@apache.org > Subject: Re: primary distribution location > > > On Wed, 5 Feb 2003, Martin van den Bemt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > There is a way around all this if you write an interface that is > > used to be generic, and have the interface implementation stored > > elsewhere. > > But "the interface implementation" would have to be LGPLed again, so > you don't really win anything. > > Stefan > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
