You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@shindig.apache.org by Dave <sn...@gmail.com> on 2009/12/11 17:41:24 UTC

LGPL code in Shindig's swfobject feature?

Code in the Shindig features/swfobject feature's onload method appears
to be a copy of LGPL code from this blog:

   http://brothercake.com/site/resources/scripts/onload

Here is the code in Shindig:

	/* Cross-browser onload
		- Based on James Edwards' solution:
http://brothercake.com/site/resources/scripts/onload/
		- Will fire an event as soon as a web page including all of its
assets are loaded
	 */
	function addLoadEvent(fn) {
		if (typeof win.addEventListener != UNDEF) {
			win.addEventListener("load", fn, false);
		}
		else if (typeof doc.addEventListener != UNDEF) {
			doc.addEventListener("load", fn, false);
		}
		else if (typeof win.attachEvent != UNDEF) {
			addListener(win, "onload", fn);
		}
		else if (typeof win.onload == "function") {
			var fnOld = win.onload;
			win.onload = function() {
				fnOld();
				fn();
			};
		}
		else {
			win.onload = fn;
		}
	}

It does to appear to be a verbatim copy of the code, but it is pretty
close and perhaps too close for comfort.

Is this acceptable to Apache legal?

Thanks,
- Dave

Re: LGPL code in Shindig's swfobject feature?

Posted by Louis Ryan <lr...@google.com>.
This came up on the swfobject tracker

http://code.google.com/p/swfobject/issues/detail?id=307

IANAL but seems OK to me.

On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 8:43 AM, Dave <sn...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 11:41 AM, Dave <sn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > It does to appear to be a verbatim copy of the code, but it is pretty
> > close and perhaps too close for comfort.
>
> Sorry, meant to say "does NOT appear to be a verbatim copy, but..."
>
> - Dave
>

Re: LGPL code in Shindig's swfobject feature?

Posted by Dave <sn...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 11:41 AM, Dave <sn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It does to appear to be a verbatim copy of the code, but it is pretty
> close and perhaps too close for comfort.

Sorry, meant to say "does NOT appear to be a verbatim copy, but..."

- Dave