From all of my dealings with licensing, your interpretation is correct.
If Tapestry depended on Hibernate to function, then there would be a
problem. However, it truly is optional. If it weren't optional, you
would have to provide a license compatible option out of the gate, with
the ability fo
I fully agree with Bob's interpretation of this. Integrations to
*optional* components have traditionally been ok. I'm sure we can find
plenty of examples of this in other projects. For example,
OpenMeetings (currently in incubation) is going way, way deeper with
their integrations to (L)GPL codeba
Me too, on first read. Well worth the discussion, though.
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Ulrich Stärk wrote:
> Hmm, yes. Makes sense if read that way. I assumed component =
> tapestry-hibernate
>
> Uli
>
> On 27.09.2012 16:25, Bob Harner wrote:
>> My "degree of dependence" phrase is a summari
Hmm, yes. Makes sense if read that way. I assumed component = tapestry-hibernate
Uli
On 27.09.2012 16:25, Bob Harner wrote:
> My "degree of dependence" phrase is a summarization of the key point
> at the link you cited,
> http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#optional
>
> Let me paste that t
My "degree of dependence" phrase is a summarization of the key point
at the link you cited,
http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#optional
Let me paste that text here, with our specific terms inserted [in brackets]:
--- start of quote ---
Can Apache projects [e.g. Tapestry Project] rely on co
On 27.09.2012 12:58, Bob Harner wrote:
> I think you might be over-thinking this. By your interpretation, we can't
> distribute the tapestry-hibernate module source because of its high degree
> of dependence on a 3rd party LGPL-licensed software. But then we *could*
> distribute that same code if w
I think you might be over-thinking this. By your interpretation, we can't
distribute the tapestry-hibernate module source because of its high degree
of dependence on a 3rd party LGPL-licensed software. But then we *could*
distribute that same code if we moved it into Tapestry-core (because
Tapestry
Folks,
I just reviewed the ASFs policy on including/linkting to software with
incompatible licenses (e.g. GPL/LGPL) [1]. If my reading is right, we are
OK to do that as long as the components depending on incompatible stuff
are not part of our official distribution. So a binary tapestry-hibernate
