On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Craig R. McClanahan wrote:
> Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 11:10:11 -0800 (PST) > From: Craig R. McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [Fwd: RE: config of struts with cactus] > > > > On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Erik Hatcher wrote: > > > Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 13:22:33 -0500 > > From: Erik Hatcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Reply-To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: [Fwd: RE: config of struts with cactus] > > > > Heads up.... and I agree that bundling some kind of > > Cactus/StrutsTestCase examples and perhaps even the API's themselves. > > We all agree that writing test cases is a good thing, right? So why not > > help out the users of Struts with what we consider best practices?! :) > > > > +1 on the concept (as long as the code has compatible licenses, which is > obviously the case for Cactus :-) -- I'm afraid I don't have time to help > on the mechanics. On the license topic ... Cactus is obviously compatible, because it uses the same license as Struts (Apache). StrutsTestCase is LGPL, which would create a problem for inclusion in an Apache distribution. *Using* Apache-licensed and LGPL code together is perfectly fine -- the issues are around redistribution. Craig -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:struts-dev-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:struts-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
