If we are _not_ distributing this project but only _using_ it, then it would be no problem at all. LGPL projects might be used this way.
Of course, if he kindly gave us permission to relicense it under ASL, then we might also package it into our distribution bundles. Not 100% sure though whether/where we need to put this on file. I'd say we contact [email protected], just to be sure. LieGrue, strub --- On Wed, 10/6/10, Dan Haywood <[email protected]> wrote: From: Dan Haywood <[email protected]> Subject: Fwd: Re: XmlHttpRequest licensing To: [email protected] Date: Wednesday, October 6, 2010, 4:51 PM Dear mentors, I've realized that one of my sister projects (restful objects) has a dependency on some LGPL software. Per the email chain below, I contacted the developer, Sergey Ilinsky, who has granted us permission with the words below: Yes, I authorize "NO framework and your sister projects accepted [2] into the Apache incubator" to use my XMLHttpRequest.js library (available at the http://code.google.com/p/xmlhttprequest/ and currently licensed under LGPL) with the ASL license. Does this make sense legally, and is it enough to put on file? Or would he need to formally license his software under ASL from his main website (and if he's not happy, then I'd need to yank it and use something else instead). Thanks, Dan -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: XmlHttpRequest licensing Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2010 17:46:26 +0100 From: Dan Haywood <[email protected]> Reply-To: [email protected] Organization: Haywood Associates Ltd. To: Sergey Ilinsky <[email protected]> Sergey, Thank you very much for your prompt reply, and for granting us this permission. I'm still learning the ropes at Apache, so I'll need to double check that the statement below suffices (and legally makes sense) but I would hope it would. ~~~ Just had a quick glance at your Ample SDK; I'm always on the lookout for new frameworks that target the UI experience. It might work quite well as an alternative default front-end for my restful interface. Just added it to the Isis wiki. But whatever, good luck with build up a community for it. Thanks again, Dan ---------------- On 06/10/2010 17:18, Sergey Ilinsky wrote: Dan, Yes, I authorize "NO framework and your sister projects accepted [2] into the Apache incubator" to use my XMLHttpRequest.js library (available at the http://code.google.com/p/xmlhttprequest/ and currently licensed under LGPL) with the ASL license. BTW, you may be interested in looking into another project I recently started - Ample SDK, Open-Source JavaScript GUI Framework http://www.amplesdk.com There are already several businesses using it for their benefit! Sergey/ On 6 October 2010 18:10, Dan Haywood <[email protected]> wrote: Hi Sergey, I came across your XMLHttpRequest a while back while writing my book [1] on the Java Naked Objects framework (perhaps you've heard of it, but then again, perhaps not) and incorporated it into some companion "sister" project to expose a RESTful interface to an NO domain model. Fast forward a year, and we've had the NO framework and my sister projects accepted [2] into the Apache incubator. Anyway... one of the requirements for Apache is that all dependencies must be ASL or equivalent. I see that you've changed the license on XMLHttpRequest from GPL to LGPL, but LGPL doesn't quite cut-it for Apache. So, my question is... would you be willing to further change your license from LGPL to ASL? Otherwise I guess I'll need to reimplement, but it's a shame to do so given such a good piece of work is already out there. Many thanks, Dan Haywood [1] http://pragprog.com/titles/dhnako [2] http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IsisProposal. -- Dan Haywood consultant, mentor, developer, author agile, ddd, oo, java, .net, sybase MA, MBCS, CITP, CEng mail: [email protected] book: Domain Driven Design using Naked Objects blog: http://danhaywood.com linked in: http://uk.linkedin.com/in/dkhaywood twitter: http://twitter.com/dkhaywood sybase: http://sybtraining.co.uk
