Jochen, I've worked with Larry some. I'm reasonably sure that he's fully tuned in. His point is that while these people may think that they've created a selective license, that such a thing has no legal substance (since it's all one jar) and so they have, effectively, dual-licensed it.
--benson On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 4:42 PM, Jochen Wiedmann <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 10:28 PM, Benson Margulies <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> As far as I'm concerned, we can take the software under the most >> liberal license available (AL 1.1) and ignore the GPL license entirely >> for our purposes. > > If Larry's view is that using GPL'ed code in general is something then > I am inclined to believe him. However, these words don't sound to me > like he did really grab the situation: Cobertura is *not* dual > licensed. Some parts of it are ASL 1.1, but others are GPL'ed. > > > -- > I Am What I Am And That's All What I Yam (Popeye) > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
