Le 26/09/14 07:55, Sebastian Oerding a écrit :
Hello,
I wondered about the licence of the Apache DS. As far as I know, it is
ASF 2.0. However the apacheds-all includes for example code from the
Bouncycastle project for parsing ASN1. Hence the licence for the
apacheds-all must contain the
Le 26/09/14 07:55, Sebastian Oerding a écrit :
Hello,
I wondered about the licence of the Apache DS. As far as I know, it is
ASF 2.0. However the apacheds-all includes for example code from the
Bouncycastle project for parsing ASN1. Hence the licence for the
apacheds-all must contain the
You are completely right. I created a ticket:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DIRSERVER-2006
Regards Sebastian
Am 26.09.2014 09:38, schrieb Emmanuel Lécharny:
In any case, the BouncyCastle license is derived from MIT, it's not a
pure MIT license. Including BC License is the way to go.
Hello,
I wondered about the licence of the Apache DS. As far as I know, it is
ASF 2.0. However the apacheds-all includes for example code from the
Bouncycastle project for parsing ASN1. Hence the licence for the
apacheds-all must contain the original licence as far as required by the
MIT
On Saturday 30 July 2005 02:13, Michael A. Olson wrote:
We don't have the no additional restrictions
language
that appears in the GPL, and specifically without limitations on
patents. So,
from a straight legal perspective, putting Berkeley DB and some Apache
Licensed software together in
On Jul 25, 2005, at 7:56 PM, Michael A. Olson wrote:
All,
Let me begin by pointing out what may be obvious -- there's no
issue of compatibility between the Apache License 2.0 and the
Sleepycat Public License. The Sleepycat license was designed to be
identical in effect with the GPL.
On Saturday 30 July 2005 01:14, Jim Jagielski wrote:
GPL says that no
other license can place restrictions or requirements on code
that the GPL does not already place on it (think of the
old AL and the advertising clause)
And for ALv2 it is about the patent grants and license termination.
have not read their licensing terms, so I need to take your word
for it. You
are effectively saying that the Berkeley DB C edition is licensed
differently, and not in to be identical in effect with the GPL
terms. If it
is LGPL terms, and the Java native interface is (c) ASF
committers
,
perhaps.
Nothing slipped through incubation Niclas. We switched from using
Berkeley DB C edition to JDBM and have no dependencies what so ever on
external software with conflicting licenses.
I have not read their licensing terms, so I need to take your word for it. You
are effectively saying
Paul Franz wrote:
As a way around the redistribution restriction, couldn't a person
create their application to use the Berkley DB JE API, but not
redistribute it. Instead have the person installing the application
grab it and install it separately. Therefore the person distributing
the
monopolistic company.
I agree. But I'm not familiar with the Apache licensing thinking,
so my opinion doesn't count for much.
I do think that the Apache DS needs to 'work' with no database per se
(to handle cases like the LDAP Proxy and the NT4 Virtual Directory
we built for Fedora DS
that the thread archive is updated periodically,
and that traffic from the weekend has not yet made it to the archive.
Let me recap the discussion as I understand it so far.
Alex Karasulu, one of the Apache DS developers, posted a question on
licensing of Sleepycat's Berkeley DB software when it's
Can you point me to a location where I can found where Redistribution
By Proxy is defined.
Paul Franz
David Boreham wrote:
Paul Franz wrote:
As a way around the redistribution restriction, couldn't a person
create their application to use the Berkley DB JE API, but not
redistribute it.
On Tuesday 26 July 2005 07:56, Michael A. Olson wrote:
Let me begin by pointing out what may be obvious -- there's no issue
of compatibility between the Apache License 2.0 and the Sleepycat
Public License. The Sleepycat license was designed to be identical in
effect with the GPL.
Ok.
Niclas Hedhman wrote:
On Tuesday 26 July 2005 07:56, Michael A. Olson wrote:
Let me begin by pointing out what may be obvious -- there's no issue
of compatibility between the Apache License 2.0 and the Sleepycat
Public License. The Sleepycat license was designed to be identical in
The Sleepycat license is that if you don't have total source
(essentially GPL) then you pay Sleepycat a fee
Personally I'd recommend an approach where you have an option
There is no such option. JE is a dead end. We do not pass along additional
restrictions beyond the ALv2 (which means
Maybe the HSQLDB and its license would be better than sleepycat ones
*IF* you want to use a SQL database, I'd suggest looking at Derby. But I
was not of the impression that we did for these purposes.
--- Noel
On 7/24/2005 4:40 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
Hi !
On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 07:04 -0400, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
The Sleepycat license is that if you don't have total source
(essentially GPL) then you pay Sleepycat a fee
Personally I'd recommend an
Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
Hi !
On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 07:04 -0400, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
The Sleepycat license is that if you don't have total source
(essentially GPL) then you pay Sleepycat a fee
Personally I'd recommend an approach where you have an option
There is no such
Alex Karasulu said:
Company A decides to integrate Apache Directory Server which
now uses JE into their product which they sell.
Does the license for JE require company A to have to license
JE from SleepyCat?
Apache Directory Server is considered to be the application that
uses Berkeley DB
Rex Wang wrote:
Alex Karasulu said:
Company A decides to integrate Apache Directory Server which
now uses JE into their product which they sell.
Does the license for JE require company A to have to license
JE from SleepyCat?
Apache Directory Server is considered to be the
.
This is antithetical to our licensing policy.
There are several other Apache Software Foundation projects that
use the Berkeley DB family of products.
We'll have to do an audit, then, to make sure that this changes.
--- Noel
cc: Cliff Schmidt, VP Legal
all,
I've been debating the use of JE rather than JDBM for use in the Apache
Directory Server. I have been meaning to do this since this article but
had questions regarding licensing:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1615549,00.asp
I do have a couple concerns associated
PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello all,
I've been debating the use of JE rather than JDBM for use in the Apache
Directory Server. I have been meaning to do this since this article but
had questions regarding licensing:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1615549,00.asp
I do have a couple concerns
one thing occured to me. how do the for profit linux distros do it?
just about every linux distro includes bdb. I wonder if there is a
licensing loophole for that?
marc
On 7/23/05, Alex Karasulu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Marc Boorshtein wrote:
While IANL, I have run into these types
Marc Boorshtein wrote:
one thing occured to me. how do the for profit linux distros do it?
just about every linux distro includes bdb. I wonder if there is a
licensing loophole for that?
Good point there has to be some sort of exception here. I was
specifically thinking about subversion
* Alex Karasulu:
Company A decides to integrate Apache Directory Server which now uses JE
into their product which they sell.
Does the license for JE require company A to have to license JE from
SleepyCat?
If they don't provide source code to their product under some kind of
free software
ahh, thats probably the loophole that distros use, you can get the
source to everything.
Marc
On 7/23/05, Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Alex Karasulu:
Company A decides to integrate Apache Directory Server which now uses JE
into their product which they sell.
Does the
Florian Weimer wrote:
* Alex Karasulu:
Company A decides to integrate Apache Directory Server which now uses JE
into their product which they sell.
Does the license for JE require company A to have to license JE from
SleepyCat?
If they don't provide source code to their product
Alex Karasulu wrote:
Florian Weimer wrote:
* Alex Karasulu:
Company A decides to integrate Apache Directory Server which now
uses JE into their product which they sell.
Does the license for JE require company A to have to license JE from
SleepyCat?
If they don't provide source
30 matches
Mail list logo
