Groovy had to change the license of its documentation from CC-A 3.0 to
the Apache License during incubation:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-167
http://markmail.org/message/2e7tehlwtpx625q4
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-7470
So I guess Commons is probably not allowed to use these files.
Am 28.11.2016 um 18:58 schrieb Gary Gregory:
On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 7:15 AM, Jochen Wiedmann <jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 4:06 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote:
The code would not run without the JCIP jar.
Are there licensing issues regarding that jar?
Hm, according to https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html, the license
"Creative Commons Attribution (CC-A) 2.5" is discussed in the section "HOW
SHOULD "WEAK COPYLEFT" LICENSES BE HANDLED?"
It looks like we might have an issue but this is not clear to me as IANAL.
I you look at the license summary
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ it sure seems OK, but our
resolved.html has this license on a list of licenses to watch out for.
So to be on the safe side, how do we best re-implement these? The
annotation names we can keep as is but I would imagine that we'd want to
re-write the Javadoc from scratch.
Thoughts?
Gary
Jochen
--
The next time you hear: "Don't reinvent the wheel!"
http://www.keystonedevelopment.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/
evolution-of-the-wheel-300x85.jpg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
