On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 12:44, Jaco de Groot wrote: > Pierre van Rooden wrote: > >Jaco de Groot wrote: > >>I expected the license to be MMBase compatible. > > > >Not really needed, as long as xmlbs is an external lib. > >We are not changing any code in it so license is not really an issue. > > Does Gerard agree? We had this discussion before: > > http://www.mmbase.org/development/mailarchive/msg115145.html > http://www.mmbase.org/development/mailarchive/msg115407.html > http://www.mmbase.org/development/mailarchive/msg115408.html > > I would like xmlbs to become a MMBase project or part of MMBase and make > Remco commitor. I got the impression that Remco was willing to do so, but > maybe I'm wrong.
I do like to become a committer and I did offer the code for inclusion into the mmbase source tree. There's 3 ways of doing this: - full inclusion; introducing an mmbase package like org.mmbase.util.xmlbs, importing all xmlbs source and replacing the xmlbs site by a notice saying it moved into mmbase. - mirroring; same as above but I'll keep working on xmlbs in my private cvs and backport every bugfix and major change back to the mmbase pacakge. - handling it as an external library and change the license if necessary. I'll make sure the jar-file stays accessible and will keep the mmbase build process and wordfilter uptodate. Currently I prefer the last option because it ensures xmlbs stays usable and accessible outside mmbase and it's the least amount of work for me but if somebody has compelling reasons to go for one of the other two options that's fine too. Remco
