This seems to come up every now and then, so I'm just mentioning what I remember from the previous times it has come up.
The word from on high is that LGPL is not to be distributed from Apache. [ie no jars etc]. No legal action has officially been taken due to the lack of funds to throw away on such things, but as LGPL is so poor at matching the Java world, I doubt any legal advice would be that firm anyway. Whether LGPL code could be used, but not distributed, I don't know. Hen On Mon, 27 Jan 2003, Paul Hammant wrote: > There is plenty of it here at Apache, but what is the official status of > LGPL. I am well aware that GPL linkage is verbotten and for good > reason. However GPL is a very different beast. > > Given that the FSF has plenty to say about Apache license in conjunction > with the GPL, but little to say about the same scenario with respect to > the LGPL, what is the situation for us? > > To clarify the use of the LGPL software - it is direct use (import and > instantiate) rather than extend or implement. I believe there is good > separation. > >http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs/jakarta-avalon-excalibur/altrmi/src/java/org/apache/excalibur/altrmi/client/impl/socket/AbstractSocketStreamSSHInvocationHandler.java > > I am aware of a recent Cocoon discussion, but cannot believe they came > to the conclusion that they could not use it. What I am really looking > for is the wisdom from those who've had legal counsel for Apache on this > subject. > > - Paul > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
