Hi,

Couple of comments inline - firstly, have opened
https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/LEGAL/issues/LEGAL-563
Hopefully OK?

It's not like it's asking any more than
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-489 mind you, but
hopefully updated info might help! :-\

On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 07:45, Jaroslav Tulach <[email protected]> wrote:
> It always depends how one tells the story. I want to find arguments for Apache
> NetBeans to bundle `nb-javac` along with the convenience binaries. When I say
> "the only purpose" I want to stress that the maintainers of `nb-javac` really
> want it to be used that way.

True!  And as maintainers that makes sense.  From the ASF / NetBeans
as consumer angle, IMO it's a positive if it's a library that has
other users than just us.  And the "entirely separate from our
products" argument is a little easier.

> > And
> > published via Oracle namespace in future?
>
> I am quite happy with current setup where Toni uploads the binaries to Maven
> central. I have no intention to change it[1].

Given that one concern (from legal) is ensuring CPE applies, eg. that
all source files used to create the resulting binary are subject to
CPE, it *might* be easier if the binary we consume was built by and
from *a* namespace belonging to the copyright holder, and with
explicit CPE license attached.  Let's see what we get back.

Best wishes,

Neil

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists



Reply via email to