> Because these classes are compiled against the jgroups jar, these > classes have to follow section 6 of the lgpl > <http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/lgpl.html>. Are you sure ?, the lgpl speaks about libraries and applications that are linked to each other, not individual class files. >If we include these classes in MMBase-core, MMBase-core needs to follow >this section also, and the license for MMBase will not be only MPL, but >also partly LGPL. Therefore I'd like to see these changes as a seperate >(downloadable) module and not included in the core. >Also if we want to distribute the jgroups lib inside the MMBase distro, >we have to include the jgroups source also in the MMBase src distro. http://www.jgroups.org/javagroupsnew/docs/license.html Here they say themserlves that commerical applications have no problem linking and using their library, how would it be possible that an opensource package does have a problem ?
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-java.html Says: If you distribute a Java application that imports LGPL libraries, it's easy to comply with the LGPL. Your application's license needs to allow users to modify the library, and reverse engineer your code to debug these modifications. This doesn't mean you need to provide source code or any details about the internals of your application. Of course, some changes the users may make to the library may break the interface, rendering the library unable to work with your application. You don't need to worry about that -- people who modify the library are responsible for making it work. ----- As far as I know we allow modification (we are MPL code) so this shouldn't be a problem either. But as you have studied this problem far more than I have, so you probably can shed some more light on this. GrtX. Rico
<<winmail.dat>>
_______________________________________________ Developers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.mmbase.org/mailman/listinfo/developers
