You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@maven.apache.org by Jack Stanley <Ja...@ironmountain.com> on 2010/08/03 00:18:54 UTC
Re: Adding the JRE + Jar ulitily to the build
Sorry for not being clear. We use Nexus. When I worked at Cisco, we used
Artifactory. I have not yet worked with this project team long enough yet
to determine which one is better.
For now, I have jarred up the JRE and uploaded it to our local Nexus
repository. We will definitely run this by legal to make sure we are in the
clear.
I found out we're already using the Assembly plugin. I made a few mods to
the POM files and we are in business... the jar is getting packaged up
properly in the build.
Jack
--
View this message in context: http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/Adding-the-JRE-Jar-ulitily-to-the-build-tp2259801p2262342.html
Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Adding the JRE + Jar ulitily to the build
Posted by Stephen Connolly <st...@gmail.com>.
IANAL,
The JRE is one thing...
Last time I checked, the JDK required that you display the EULA to the end
user when installing the JDK...
The net result was that we had to split up our one click installer into
four: install the non-java stuff (Apache HTTPD), then the Sun JDK installer,
then the open source java stuff (Apache Tomcat) and then finally our
commercial code installer.
But your legal heads can make their judgement calls as they see fit
-Stephen
On 4 August 2010 01:00, Jack Stanley <Ja...@ironmountain.com> wrote:
>
> Legal reviewed the license agreement:
> http://www.java.com/en/download/license.jsp . We already distribute the
> JRE
> as part of another product. We do not see any problems with distributing
> the whole and complete JRE or the JDK.
>
> There is some wording under section B of the SUPPLEMENTAL LICENSE TERMS
> section. We are not entirely sure if we are "modifying" the software as
> per
> this section. We only want to repackage the JRE to include the JDK. We
> are
> not redistributing the software... it will be installed as a hosted
> solution
> in our own data centers. Based in this information, it is our opinion that
> it is ok to distribute the JRE + jar utility.
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/Adding-the-JRE-Jar-ulitily-to-the-build-tp2259801p2263529.html
> Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
Re: Adding the JRE + Jar ulitily to the build
Posted by Jack Stanley <Ja...@ironmountain.com>.
Legal reviewed the license agreement:
http://www.java.com/en/download/license.jsp . We already distribute the JRE
as part of another product. We do not see any problems with distributing
the whole and complete JRE or the JDK.
There is some wording under section B of the SUPPLEMENTAL LICENSE TERMS
section. We are not entirely sure if we are "modifying" the software as per
this section. We only want to repackage the JRE to include the JDK. We are
not redistributing the software... it will be installed as a hosted solution
in our own data centers. Based in this information, it is our opinion that
it is ok to distribute the JRE + jar utility.
--
View this message in context: http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/Adding-the-JRE-Jar-ulitily-to-the-build-tp2259801p2263529.html
Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Adding the JRE + Jar ulitily to the build
Posted by Ron Wheeler <rw...@artifact-software.com>.
Sounds like you are doing things the way it was intended and the way
that most people do it.
I would be interested in hearing what your legal eagles have to say.
Ron
On 02/08/2010 6:18 PM, Jack Stanley wrote:
> Sorry for not being clear. We use Nexus. When I worked at Cisco, we used
> Artifactory. I have not yet worked with this project team long enough yet
> to determine which one is better.
>
> For now, I have jarred up the JRE and uploaded it to our local Nexus
> repository. We will definitely run this by legal to make sure we are in the
> clear.
>
> I found out we're already using the Assembly plugin. I made a few mods to
> the POM files and we are in business... the jar is getting packaged up
> properly in the build.
>
> Jack
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org