we are considering a license change
marc
|-----Original Message-----
|From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ari Suutari
|Sent: Friday, November 03, 2000 7:28 AM
|To: jBoss Developer
|Subject: Re: [jBoss-Dev] Tomcat & Licensing
|
|
|Hey guys,
|
|I think everyone admits that jBoss team has written
|quite a cool piece of software. And the whole development
|process seems to be so intensive....
|
|As the result seems to be very solid technically the only
|thing that can prevent jBoss from total success is it's licensing.
|I think jBoss deserves a cooler license than just GPL -
|what are you afraid of that could happen with more liberal
|licenses ? If you had a more liberal license (BSD-style for
|example) and company X took jBoss in their product and
|sold it, that wouldn't stop your project. And if that company
|writes some add-ons to it, it would make very much sense for
|them to give that code to jBoss project also (I think that
|something like this happens a lot for example in FreeBSD
|world).
|
|And, with more liberal license, all this discussion about
|various problems arising from GPL would be totally unnecessary.
|Also, as quite a lot of internet-related stuff (apache, tomcat....)
|uses something else than GPL it would be much easier to integrate
|all these things. Also, people inside software houses could
|use jBoss without fearing their software to turn into
|GPL stuff also. Wouldn't the result be total success ?
|
|Regards,
|
| Ari S.
|
|
|
|
|> So I see we're adding still more jBoss code that directly
|> references Tomcat classes. We wrote some interceptors, we call Tomcat to
|> configure them, etc.
|> The whole licensing thread seem to have died under it's own weight
|> - which is OK, the heat was rising a little too fast for comfort. But I
|> think it's more important than ever that something is done about the
|> current jBoss license. We're quickly passing the point where we could
|> "factor out" all the Tomcat specifics and claim to be using some generic
|> interface. I think it's very clear that we're tightly integrated with
|> Tomcat (I see around 20 instances of "org.apache.tomcat"), and IMHO we
|> cannot claim to be "merely aggregating".
|>
|> Aaron
|>
|>
|
|
|
