Re: [Fwd: Re: licensing question]

[Arnaud HERITIER <ah...@gmail.com>]

I put the team in copy because it's important to not do a bad choice.

On Nov 26, 2007 12:10 PM, Richard van Nieuwenhoven <ri...@gmx.at> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> i just asked Cliff (see attachment) and he says that only binary
> redistribution is an option.
>
> So four options left:
> - extraction during build. and package as classes


This option is impossible I think because it will bundle a version of the
classe which will depend of the environment. We'll not be able to controle
what we use and how we'll do in the integration server. I don't want to
install eclipse on the integration server.


>
> - real dependency

It's perhaps the best solution ? We could create an upload request for this
jar ?

>
> - attach the xxx-eclipse-plugin.jar as an artefact

another jar with only those 2 classes ??


> - path to the eclipse home directory

we could use a system dependency of the eclipse plugin but the problem is
that we'll have to set it even if the user doesn't use it.


> where do you want to go?


At home ?? ;-)


>
> regards,
> Ritchie
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Cliff Schmidt" <cl...@apache.org>
> To: "Richard van Nieuwenhoven" <ri...@gmx.at>
> Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 02:37:26 -0800
> Subject: Re: licensing question
> Hi Richard,
>
> The best place for this question is the legal-discuss mailing list.
> I'm not able to spend much time on these issues these days; I'm also
> no longer the Apache VP of Legal Affairs (that's Sam Ruby now), but
> there are lots of sharp people on the legal-discuss list who can help
> (including Sam and several others).
>
> However, here's a quick thought: the EPL source will always have to be
> EPL - so you can't include it in the source of a plugin that doesn't
> acknowledge that.  However, the EPL does allow for binaries of EPL
> source to be distributed under other licenses.  That might be an
> option for you, but there are lots of requirements to make sure you
> are following if you do that.
>
> Cliff
>
> On Nov 26, 2007 2:11 AM, Richard van Nieuwenhoven <ri...@gmx.at> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > i have a licensing question for a maven project:
> > http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MECLIPSE-344
> >
> > In this patch we need 2 class files that are under EPL, but the plugin
> > is under ASL.
> >
> > How can we include these 2 classes without violating any licenses?
> >
> > thanks for any help,
> > Ritchie
> >
> > P.S.
> > I asked this question on the maven development mailing list and there
> > somebody referenced you as a legal expert.
> >
> > Thread title: "copieing sources in to a maven-plugin"
> >
>
>
>


-- 
..........................................................
Arnaud HERITIER
..........................................................
OCTO Technology - aheritier AT octo DOT com
www.octo.com | blog.octo.com
..........................................................
ASF - aheritier AT apache DOT org
www.apache.org | maven.apache.org
...........................................................