In addition, if the LGPL (or a less open licensing) dependency makes it hard to set up and run automated tests on an ongoing basis, it does nullify the spirit of the one release doctrine. To honor the doctrine may lead to painful refactoring, but I do think it is essential for Toree to be truly open.
Shankar On Fri, 20 May 2016 at 09:42 Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > On 5/20/16, 9:32 AM, "Edward Capriolo" <edlinuxg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >Yes if you are using a feature specific to a specific product it is > >obvious > >even if you wrap cruft around it. however when I see something that uses > >"rabbit mq" i generally think to wrap an interface around it so I can > >replace with Apache Kafka :).I am wondering if the same be done here. > > Interface abstraction might be a good engineering design decision, but it > won't affect the perceived LPGL dependency if a significant number of your > users must bring down an LPGL dependency in order to have a satisfactory > solution. It isn't whether they "can" replace RabbitMQ with Apache Kafka, > it is whether they will. > > -Alex > >
