On Mon, 15 Mar 2004, Vincent Massol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is that really called "redistributing"?
I'm a German native speaker, in case you are questioning my language 8-) Providing a download is a form of distribution, yes. > Also, what about this page: http://gump.covalent.net/jars/latest/? > It does the same thing, no? Only for jars created by projects that have a <redistributable/> element or inherit it from the module or even repository definition that applies to them. > In any case, Gump could simply not build non-redistributable jars > (it could simply have them installed as packages). There are quite a few (L)GPLed projects that Gump builds, and it should IMHO. Those are perfectly legal to distribute but we don't do so because of Apache in-house policies. We'd loose the early warning feature, which is something I wouldn't want to loose just because a given project has elected a license I don't agree with. Note that the early warning works in two ways. If a projects builds using Ant and breaks because of a change in Ant, I want to know about it, no matter which license the project uses. Stefan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
