Il giorno 11/ago/04, alle 09:41, Dirk-Willem van Gulik ha scritto:
On Wed, 11 Aug 2004, Ugo Cei wrote:
Stupid and counter to what they have publicly stated many times, that their own interpretation of the LGPL is that it is not viral.
However over the years we've not managed to get a public statement (or an
updated L-GPL license) which makes clear that 'import foo' in java should
be considered similar to the *.h/linking of C.
I'm aware of this. What I meant is that the Hibernate guys (and not the FSF) have publicly stated that their own interpretation of the license they have attached to their own code is that you can use it from a project that has a different license (even a closed-source one) and not be forced to distribute your own code under the (L)GPL.
It would be hard, I think, to state the opposite in a court, but IANAL ;-)
In any case, what we are discussing is not importing or even distributing Hibernate code, but importing (and possibly distributing) Spring code which is contained in a JAR file that contains other classes that import Hibernate classes, even if we don't use the former (Spring) classes at all. It would be pretty hard to say that Cocoon becomes a derivative work of Hibernate because of that. But then again, IANAL.
And if we really want to cover our asses against this possibility, we can always strip the offending classes from the spring-orm.jar archive, since we wouldn't be depending on them at all.
Ugo
-- Ugo Cei - http://beblogging.com/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
