On Friday, March 02, 2012 12:56:40 PM Reuben Garrett wrote: > RabbitMQ appears to be licensed under MPL 1.1 [1], but there is a new MPL > 2.0 [2] that is purportedly more Apache-friendly [3]. Are MPL 2.0 projects > compatible for incorporation in APL projects? I don't fully understand all > the intricacies entailed, but perhaps new possibilities will arise [4].
MPL is a category-b license and is OK in binary form. See: http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b Dan > > [1] : http://www.rabbitmq.com/mpl.html > [2] : http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/2.0/ > [3] : > http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/mozilla-license-becoming-apache-compat > ible/6039 [4] : > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rabbitmq-discuss/O1VTqoquetU/discussion > > ~ RNPG > > On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 12:16, Ashwin Karpe <aka...@fusesource.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I believe, I had seen a submission a few months ago of a Camel RabbitMQ > > component and had referred it to be hosted in camel-extras or at git-hub. > > > > Can you please look for it in this forum and in camel-extras/github... The > > component was quite compelling and could not be brought into the Apache > > Camel offering due to license restrictions in RabbitMQ. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Ashwin... > > > > ----- > > --------------------------------------------------------- > > Ashwin Karpe > > Apache Camel Committer & Sr Principal Consultant > > FUSESource (a Progress Software Corporation subsidiary) > > http://fusesource.com > > > > Blog: http://opensourceknowledge.blogspot.com > > --------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > > View this message in context: > > http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Camel-features-depending-on-Camel-Compon > > ent-tp5528357p5528713.html Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list > > archive at Nabble.com. -- Daniel Kulp dk...@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
