So I guess the easiest solution would be to move junit, emma and libidn out of our source, and instead set up ant to download them at build time? That's reaching the limits of my java-fu so if there's anyone that can spare what i assume is only a quick job that'd be excellent.
I guess the question we should be asking is do we download all our dependancies? Or just leave the ones that aren't licensed nicely to be downloaded with everything kept in the source. Thanks Angus Turner [email protected] On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 6:58 PM, Chris Mear <[email protected]> wrote: > On 13 September 2012 07:23, Angus Turner <[email protected]> wrote: > > We have some licensing issues that are preventing us from going ahead > > with the release: > > -junit and emma both use the common public license, which isn't > > compatible with the apache one > > The Apache Foundation's list of resolved legal questions states that > CPL 1.0-licensed dependencies may be included in binary form: > > http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b > > as long as it is clearly labelled. > > Also, this answer suggests that even tools under 'prohibited' licenses > may be used if they're just part of the build and not actually > distributed with your project: > > http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#prohibited > > I'm just a lurker and not a Java developer, so don't know if that > helps in this case, but thought it worth sharing just in case. Might > also be worth asking the legal-discuss mailing list about the issue? > > Cheers, > Chris Mear >
