Nick Chalko wrote:
Ceki G�lc� wrote:
I think bea, does this. It is one way of ensuring that bea will use exactly the version of log4j they want without naming/classpath confilts. I think it is fine as long as the NOTICE with attribution to the ASF is left.
In one of my current projects I have come across some 3rd-party commercial product, that they have renamed the package-structure (from org.apache.log4j to com.COMPANY.org.apache.log4j) - just wanted to know if this does not violate the Apache Software license?
java (unlike c#) does not have a versioning concept for classes so many people are resulting in changing package names to do exactly that and make sure that you don't trigger class cast exceptions during classloading.
[cocoon is currently voting about doing the same on the other side, changing the name of the rhino packages to avoid collision with rhino shipped with weblogic and websphere]
also, keep in mind that there is nothing in the license that stops people from changing package names.
You could think that the use of the name "apache" and "log4j" in the package name would be considered abusive, but this would result in them changing the name entirely and this would not solve any issue.
In short: if they give credits, they are in good faith, if not, no matter what they do with the software, they are abusive... but package name change should not be considered abusive as such, but rather a necessity that arised out of java internal limitations.
-- Stefano.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
