I assume ERExtensions/Documentation/LICENSE.NPL does... so what about NPL has this audit deemed offensive?
Ramsey On May 9, 2011, at 4:19 PM, Dov Rosenberg wrote: > Those acknowledgements are required if you are using some types of open > source licenses like LGPL. Those do not constitute proper licensing for > project wonder > > Dov Rosenberg > > On May 9, 2011, at 6:14 PM, "Ramsey Gurley" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On May 9, 2011, at 2:37 PM, Dov Rosenberg wrote: >> >>> Just having gone thru an extensive software audit of all of the third party >>> licensing that our company uses (including WebObjects and Project Wonder >>> among a zillion other things). I would like to propose that Project Wonder >>> adopt a more consistent license for the code base. The best licenses for >>> open source products to use so that commercial products can utilize those >>> components are Apache 2.0, BSD, and MIT. It would be best to include the >>> license file in the download for binary and source for WOProject and >>> Project Wonder. Right now I think these items are under an old NetStruxr >>> license thru objectstyle. It was very difficult to find the license files >>> for Project Wonder and WOProject >>> >>> Any component licensed under GPL, LGPL 3.0, EPL, CPL were poison to us and >>> we had to remove them. LGPL v2.1 components sucked less and we were allowed >>> to keep them as long as we didn't modify them in any way. >>> >>> Dov Rosenberg >> >> http://wiki.objectstyle.org/confluence/display/WONDER/Acknowledgements >> >> Ramsey >> _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected]) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to [email protected]
