[Demo] dependency to mail / activation

[Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>]

Hi Adam,

since the ADF Faces demo from the drop depends mail/activation JARs, I
mail you this URL ([1]). Looks like that JARs are now available from a
public m2 repo (at ibiblio).

-Matthias

[1] http://jroller.com/page/carlossg?entry=sun_jars_available_in_maven

--
Matthias Wessendorf
Aechterhoek 18
48282 Emsdetten
http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com

Re: [Demo] dependency to mail / activation

[Adam Winer <aw...@gmail.com>]

FYI, these dependencies are only for a demo.  Thanks
for the link on licensing.

-- Adam

On 5/3/06, Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 5/3/06, Mike Kienenberger <mk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 5/3/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > having dependency on these should be fine IMHO (regarding licensing),
> > > since some ASF projects depend on JavaMail as well ([1] and [2])
> > >
> > > -Matthias
> > >
> > > [1] http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/email/
> > > [2] http://james.apache.org/
> >
> > Just because some projects are doing it now doesn't mean it's ok.
>
>
> CDDL (the license for the jars in question) is on the Category B list, which
> means you can use these as binary dependencies, as long as the appropriate
> notifications are included in the NOTICE.txt file.
>
> I'd recommend looking at this document for all of your licensing questions:
> >
> > http://people.apache.org/~cliffs/3party.html
> >
>
> Good advice.
>
> Craig
>
>

Re: [Demo] dependency to mail / activation

[Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org>]

On 5/3/06, Mike Kienenberger <mk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 5/3/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > having dependency on these should be fine IMHO (regarding licensing),
> > since some ASF projects depend on JavaMail as well ([1] and [2])
> >
> > -Matthias
> >
> > [1] http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/email/
> > [2] http://james.apache.org/
>
> Just because some projects are doing it now doesn't mean it's ok.


CDDL (the license for the jars in question) is on the Category B list, which
means you can use these as binary dependencies, as long as the appropriate
notifications are included in the NOTICE.txt file.

I'd recommend looking at this document for all of your licensing questions:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~cliffs/3party.html
>

Good advice.

Craig

Re: [Demo] dependency to mail / activation

[Mike Kienenberger <mk...@gmail.com>]

On 5/3/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> keep in mind, that this is *only* a draft yet!
> That was discussed on "legal-discuss" list at ASF


While it's true that it's only a draft, it's a draft on the verge of
being official policy.   In fact, I expected to see an announcement on
it by this point, but I guess Cliff has two more days, depending on
how you define "this month"  :-)

If you've heard something different from "legal-discuss", please let
me know.   I don't follow that list, but this was the last thing I
heard from Cliff Schmidt.

On 4/5/06, Cliff Schmidt <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It's definitely public; it's been discussed on the public
> legal-discuss list for a few weeks now.  It's not official just yet,
> but it will be this month after incorporating feedback over the last
> few weeks of discussions.

Re: [Demo] dependency to mail / activation

[Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>]

On 5/3/06, Mike Kienenberger <mk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Just because some projects are doing it now doesn't mean it's ok.
>
> I'd recommend looking at this document for all of your licensing questions:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~cliffs/3party.html


keep in mind, that this is *only* a draft yet!
That was discussed on "legal-discuss" list at ASF

-Matthias

Re: [Demo] dependency to mail / activation

[Mike Kienenberger <mk...@gmail.com>]

On 5/3/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> having dependency on these should be fine IMHO (regarding licensing),
> since some ASF projects depend on JavaMail as well ([1] and [2])
>
> -Matthias
>
> [1] http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/email/
> [2] http://james.apache.org/

Just because some projects are doing it now doesn't mean it's ok.

I'd recommend looking at this document for all of your licensing questions:

http://people.apache.org/~cliffs/3party.html

Re: [Demo] dependency to mail / activation

[Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>]

having dependency on these should be fine IMHO (regarding licensing),
since some ASF projects depend on JavaMail as well ([1] and [2])

-Matthias

[1] http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/email/
[2] http://james.apache.org/

On 5/3/06, Adam Winer <aw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sweet!  I was worried about those two specifically.
>
> Thanks,
> Adam
>
>
> On 5/3/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Hi Adam,
> >
> > since the ADF Faces demo from the drop depends mail/activation JARs, I
> > mail you this URL ([1]). Looks like that JARs are now available from a
> > public m2 repo (at ibiblio).
> >
> > -Matthias
> >
> > [1] http://jroller.com/page/carlossg?entry=sun_jars_available_in_maven
> >
> > --
> > Matthias Wessendorf
> > Aechterhoek 18
> > 48282 Emsdetten
> > http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> > mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
> >
>


--
Matthias Wessendorf
Aechterhoek 18
48282 Emsdetten
http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com

Re: [Demo] dependency to mail / activation

[Adam Winer <aw...@gmail.com>]

Sweet!  I was worried about those two specifically.

Thanks,
Adam


On 5/3/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi Adam,
>
> since the ADF Faces demo from the drop depends mail/activation JARs, I
> mail you this URL ([1]). Looks like that JARs are now available from a
> public m2 repo (at ibiblio).
>
> -Matthias
>
> [1] http://jroller.com/page/carlossg?entry=sun_jars_available_in_maven
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
> Aechterhoek 18
> 48282 Emsdetten
> http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
> mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
>