http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/software/soa/GPL-likely-to-regain-Apache-compatibility/0,130061733,339276229,00.htm(english) http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2007/04/gplv3_apache_li.html (english) http://www.heise.de/open/news/meldung/90483 (german)
for example regards David 2007/6/11, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
where did u read it ? On 6/11/07, David Steinkopff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I read LGPLv3/GPLv3 will be compatible with Apache License 2.0. Its in that > case possible to include dependencies to LGPLv3 code? > > regards > David > > 2007/6/10, Martin Marinschek < [EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > No, we cannot include source/binary-dependencies to LGPL code - sorry. > > > > regards, > > > > Martin > > > > On 6/6/07, Cagatay Civici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > To begin with jboss uses lgpl and that's not compatible with ASF > license. > > > > > > Also frankly I do not want to mess with Jboss stuff cos MyFaces might > face > > > with their lawyers too as in Apache Geronimo case in 2004;) > > > > > > On the other hand facelets is always cool. > > > > > > > > > On 6/6/07, Mike Kienenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Don't know about Seam, RichFaces, or A4J, but I know that integrated > > > > support for facelets is already part of Tobago and Trinidad, and is > > > > planned for the next version of Tomahawk (for which I recently saw > > > > someone create a new branch) by leveraging the infrastructure that > > > > Trinidad provides. > > > > > > > > On 6/6/07, Andrew Robinson < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > The more I use JSF, the more comfortable I get with some of the 3rd > > > > > party open source libraries and the strengths and weaknesses of > each. > > > > > Until the JSF specification catches up with the common add-on > > > > > technologies for JSF, the proverbial wheel is getting re-invented > all > > > > > the time (PPR, skinning, validation, JavaScript libraries, etc.). > > > > > > > > > > I find myself often using features from Facelets, MyFaces Tomahawk, > > > > > MyFaces Sandbox, Seam framework and some of the components, A4J > > > > > framework and components and a little of the RichFaces components > > > > > (tree mainly) (and JDK 1.5 enhancements too). > > > > > > > > > > When I think about contributing new components and framework code to > > > > > the open source community, I want to leverage combinations of these > > > > > frameworks, and not have to re-invent the wheel. I'm never sure > where > > > > > to put this code, and for those projects that I decided to forward > > > > > with I have put them with jsf-comp on sourceforge, but I'd rather > have > > > > > them with a larger community for better support. > > > > > > > > > > I'm wondering what the MyFaces and ASF teams would think about new > > > > > projects under the MyFaces umbrella that leverage other libraries > > > > > provided by JBoss. For example: > > > > > > > > > > - MyFaces+A4J > > > > > - MyFaces+RichFaces > > > > > - MyFaces+Seam > > > > > - MyFaces+Facelets > > > > > > > > > > This would give open source developers, that find ASF easier to work > > > > > with as an open source foundation, an opportunity to provide new > > > > > components that extend the JBoss libraries without having to > > > > > contribute to JBoss, a commercially owned company. > > > > > > > > > > What implications are there with this (Facelets vs. JBoss vs. apache > > > > > licenses -- CDDL vs. LGPL vs. ApacheV2)? > > > > > > > > > > Is this something that MyFaces/ASF would be interested in, or is it > > > > > recommended more that code that extends JBoss projects be part of > the > > > > > JBoss offerings? > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Andrew > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > http://www.irian.at > > > > Your JSF powerhouse - > > JSF Consulting, Development and > > Courses in English and German > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces > > > > -- Matthias Wessendorf further stuff: blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
