Of course the workaround here, if it can't be CQ-approved, is to state that you will only be USING this library, but not distributing it. This is how we can legally use ant-contrib, ant4eclipse, and pde-svn, without them living in cvs/svn @ eclipse.org and without ipzilla approval.
On 4/2/09, Andrew Overholt <overh...@redhat.com> wrote: > Hi Lothar, > > On Wed, 2009-04-01 at 08:15 -0700, Lothar Werzinger wrote: >> On Wednesday 01 April 2009, Andrew Overholt wrote: >> > Hi Lothar, >> > >> > On Tue, 2009-03-31 at 11:18 -0700, Lothar Werzinger wrote: >> > > The unit test framework is BSD licensed. >> > >> > Would it make sense to re-license it to EPL? I think it has to be EPL'd >> > to be hosted at eclipse.org (but I could be wrong here). >> >> I think BSD is OK, too but you may check. I could license it under both >> licenses. The main reason it's BSD is that being a template library I >> wanted >> the license as open as possible. > > I asked the Eclipse legal team about the license and they said: > > "Any source code put into our SCMs has to be EPL. We have to get board > approval for any dual-licensing scheme. > > FWIW, BSD is a template license. You'll have to post the actual license > they're planning to use. > > I took a quick look through the file attached to the first message and > found that SconsBuildDoxygen.py states that is it GPL in the header." > > So I guess the unit test framework will be more difficult. The scons > builder is pure EPL, right? > > Andrew > > _______________________________________________ > linux-distros-dev mailing list > linux-distros-dev@eclipse.org > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-distros-dev > -- Sent from my mobile device Nick Boldt :: JBoss, a division of Red Hat Productization Lead :: JBoss Tools & Dev Studio Release Engineer :: Eclipse Modeling & Dash CBI http://wiki.eclipse.org/User:Nickb _______________________________________________ linux-distros-dev mailing list linux-distros-dev@eclipse.org https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-distros-dev