Hi, scriptalicious should not be an issue, as it is already in other Apache projects (eg: tapestry or wicket).
Cheers, 2010/5/10 Simon Stewart <simon.m.stew...@gmail.com>: > Hi, > > Thanks for bringing this up: time to start sorting it out. The move > from cssQuery to sizzle seems sensible to me, I'm all for it. > > I can ask about the Google licensed code and get some clarification on that. > > Snapsie was written by Haw-Bin, who's a selenium developer. We can ping him > too. > > If scriptalicious proves tricky, please let us know! > > Simon > >> cssQuery is licensed under LGPL -> migration to sizzle would do the trick >> util.js / dom.js / xmltoken.js / xpath.js (in core/xpath/) are >> licensed to Google, and written by Steffen Meschkat >> <me...@google.com>. Would he agree to choose an Apache-2 compatible >> license ? >> snapsie.js does not have a licence header >> scriptaculous does not mention a license, but a quick question to the > > > On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 5:39 PM, Erwan de FERRIERES > <erwan.deferrie...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi all, >> For the Apache OFBiz project (ofbiz.apache.org), we are regularly >> asking the same question about license on selenium rc, in order to >> integrate the jar into our project. Apache Foundation rules are very >> stricts about licenses (http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html), >> and when looking inside the selenium-rc jar, some files are not >> graduating for inclusion. >> >> A long time ago, these issue was created inside our jira instance : >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-680?focusedCommentId=12470728&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12470728 >> It's still true for the files mentionned. >> >> So, what we have : >> cssQuery is licensed under LGPL -> migration to sizzle would do the trick >> util.js / dom.js / xmltoken.js / xpath.js (in core/xpath/) are >> licensed to Google, and written by Steffen Meschkat >> <me...@google.com>. Would he agree to choose an Apache-2 compatible >> license ? >> snapsie.js does not have a licence header >> scriptaculous does not mention a license, but a quick question to the >> Apache legal team should give us the answer. >> >> The sizzle issue has already been created : >> http://code.google.com/p/selenium/issues/detail?id=336 >> >> This email is sent after some tweet exchanges between Simon, Hans and >> me, as we were talking about licenses. 140 chars is a bit too small >> for this ! >> >> Cheers, >> >> -- >> Erwan de FERRIERES >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Selenium Developers" group. >> To post to this group, send email to selenium-develop...@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> selenium-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/selenium-developers?hl=en. >> >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Selenium Developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to selenium-develop...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > selenium-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/selenium-developers?hl=en. > > -- Erwan de FERRIERES tel p. : 06 32 88 20 22
