> On Dec 23, 2015, at 4:07 PM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> wrote: > > Are you referring to the bin or src distribution?
Kind of both… By removing the binary from the src distribution, that covers that case. The user would have to cd into the appropriate directory and explicitly run the “make” or whatever to build the binary. It’s an explicit choice they make. Thus, I’m completely OK with that now. The bin distribution is still an issue. If the default was to not use the libaio at all unless the user either edited a config file to enable it or pass a command line flag or similar to take explicit action, I’d be OK there as well. The new wording on the legal pages is completely confusing. The original suggested wording in: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-54 makes so much more sense: "However, projects may use LGPL licensed works in optional features that are not enabled by default.” Dan > > On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 4:05 PM Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> wrote: > >> >> Question: If I grab Artemis 1.1.0 tarbal/zip and start up the broker “out >> of the box”, does it use libaio or not? If I specifically have to >> configure something (pass a flag, edit a config file, etc…) to enable use >> if the LGPL library, then fine. However, if it’s something that occurs >> completely automatically without the user even knowing that it’s occurring, >> then I have a major problem with it. It needs to be something that the >> user has to explicitly CHOOSE to use. >> >> Dan >> >> >> >>> On Dec 23, 2015, at 2:02 PM, Clebert Suconic <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> also, there has also been questions about it during the donation >>> process.. licenses reviewed.. etc.. so I don't think we need to open a >>> new discussions over this. the binary inclusion on the source was >>> something that was fixed now. >>> >>> The dependency on libaio on the C code is through through dynamic >>> linked library, and is the same as any C code depending on libc or >>> gcc. >>> >>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 1:58 PM, Clebert Suconic >>> <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 1:55 PM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> >> wrote: >>>>> Just wondering, does anyone plan to raise the LGPL question w/ legal >>>>> discuss? If we're waiting for the new year to do the next release, >> would >>>>> be good to at least start the discussion. >>>> >>>> >>>> We had such discussion long ago with legal. I couldn't find that email >>>> on my inbox but we specifically asked questions about it. We were ok >>>> as I remember. Maybe someone else (Martyn?) will have it on their >>>> inboxes. For that reason I don't want to go over the same issue we had >>>> asked before. >>>> >>>> The use of libaio is optional anyways and the system works as >>>> expected. what also covers other questions we had here on this thread. >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Clebert Suconic >> >> -- >> Daniel Kulp >> dk...@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog >> Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com >> >> -- Daniel Kulp dk...@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
