You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@maven.apache.org by J Aaron Farr <ja...@yahoo.com> on 2003/04/15 15:42:21 UTC
licenses and repositories
Greetings,
Does anyone have a suggestion on how to handle dependencies which cannot be
redistributed due to licensing, i.e. -- many of Sun's j2ee jar files?
We have an open source project which we want to "mavenize" and offer our own
remote repository to handle any dependencies not currently on ibiblio. All
dependencies are covered under a BSD, Apache, LGPL or similar license except
for a few Sun J2EE-related jar files. Sun's Binary Code License Agreement
doesn't always allow for redistribution and even if it does that is usually
only as "bundled as part of your Programs" which isn't really the case if you
have the jar file accessable on a public maven repository.
If we can't find open source equivalants, one option is to put a note in the
release documentation notifying the user that they will have to manually
download the dependency and place it in their local repository. Perhaps a
better solution is to "bundle" the jar with the release and then use the
maven.xml to auto-deploy the dependencies to the local repository, but I'm not
certain if that properly meets Sun's licensing agreement.
Has anyone else faced this problem, and if so, any better ideas?
Thanks,
jaaron
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
http://search.yahoo.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
Re: licenses and repositories
Posted by Jason van Zyl <ja...@zenplex.com>.
On Tue, 2003-04-15 at 20:21, dion@multitask.com.au wrote:
> Rather than just give up, is there some way we can rekindle the
> discussions with Sun?
Geir is the man to talk to, and there's a very brief xdoc on what's
happened so far as the Sun Java Mail fellow was supposed to get back to
Geir and myself and never bothered to respond. Tom Kincaid is his name,
he's the manager of JavaMail which is what we tried for first.
> Or maybe get an explicit license for ibiblio to
> redistribute the jars?
That's exactly what we tried for. Feel free to talk to Geir.
> --
> dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
> Blog: http://www.freeroller.net/page/dion/Weblog
> Work: http://www.multitask.com.au
>
>
> Jason van Zyl <ja...@zenplex.com> wrote on 16/04/2003 12:02:04 AM:
>
> > On Tue, 2003-04-15 at 09:42, J Aaron Farr wrote:
> > > Greetings,
> > >
> > > Does anyone have a suggestion on how to handle dependencies which
> cannot be
> > > redistributed due to licensing, i.e. -- many of Sun's j2ee jar files?
> >
> > You basically have to set up your own repository, or install them
> > manually.
> >
> > I have started discussions with Geir and some folks at Sun but as per
> > usual things seem to have petered out. The first targets for free
> > distribution were JAF and JavaMail but that seems to be going no where.
> > This partly prompted me to make the change I did in maven-core (the new
> > maven stuff) to dump anything JAXP. If Sun is not going to support us
> > then I'm going to do everything not to support Sun and at every last
> > opportunity I will dump a Sun API in favour of an open API. I'm frankly
> > tired of this shit and there's no reason why a group of people can't
> > come up with something equal if not better than JAF or JavaMail.
> >
> > > We have an open source project which we want to "mavenize" and offer
> our own
> > > remote repository to handle any dependencies not currently on ibiblio.
> All
> > > dependencies are covered under a BSD, Apache, LGPL or similar license
> except
> > > for a few Sun J2EE-related jar files. Sun's Binary Code License
> Agreement
> > > doesn't always allow for redistribution and even if it does that is
> usually
> > > only as "bundled as part of your Programs" which isn't really the case
> if you
> > > have the jar file accessable on a public maven repository.
> >
> > Right. You technically can't redistribute them for development purposes
> > even though a couple people at Sun we talked to agreed that what Maven
> > is acceptable though not technically allowed.
> >
> > > If we can't find open source equivalants, one option is to put a note
> in the
> > > release documentation notifying the user that they will have to
> manually
> > > download the dependency and place it in their local repository.
> Perhaps a
> > > better solution is to "bundle" the jar with the release and then use
> the
> > > maven.xml to auto-deploy the dependencies to the local repository, but
> I'm not
> > > certain if that properly meets Sun's licensing agreement.
> >
> > We can't bundle the non-dist JARs. It's obvious that these wouldn't be
> > for a specific binary use. I am trying with Geir's help to lobby for the
> > release of some of these JARs but it's getting very annoying and very
> > tiresome.
> >
> > > Has anyone else faced this problem, and if so, any better ideas?
> >
> > I would just like to reimplement JAF and JavaMail, that's what I would
> > really like to do. It's an easier position for me to take because I use
> > as few Sun APIs as possible.
> >
> > > Thanks,
> > > jaaron
> > >
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
> > > http://search.yahoo.com
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
> > --
> > jvz.
> >
> > Jason van Zyl
> > jason@zenplex.com
> > http://tambora.zenplex.org
> >
> > In short, man creates for himself a new religion of a rational
> > and technical order to justify his work and to be justified in it.
> >
> > -- Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
--
jvz.
Jason van Zyl
jason@zenplex.com
http://tambora.zenplex.org
In short, man creates for himself a new religion of a rational
and technical order to justify his work and to be justified in it.
-- Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
Re: licenses and repositories
Posted by di...@multitask.com.au.
Rather than just give up, is there some way we can rekindle the
discussions with Sun? Or maybe get an explicit license for ibiblio to
redistribute the jars?
--
dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
Blog: http://www.freeroller.net/page/dion/Weblog
Work: http://www.multitask.com.au
Jason van Zyl <ja...@zenplex.com> wrote on 16/04/2003 12:02:04 AM:
> On Tue, 2003-04-15 at 09:42, J Aaron Farr wrote:
> > Greetings,
> >
> > Does anyone have a suggestion on how to handle dependencies which
cannot be
> > redistributed due to licensing, i.e. -- many of Sun's j2ee jar files?
>
> You basically have to set up your own repository, or install them
> manually.
>
> I have started discussions with Geir and some folks at Sun but as per
> usual things seem to have petered out. The first targets for free
> distribution were JAF and JavaMail but that seems to be going no where.
> This partly prompted me to make the change I did in maven-core (the new
> maven stuff) to dump anything JAXP. If Sun is not going to support us
> then I'm going to do everything not to support Sun and at every last
> opportunity I will dump a Sun API in favour of an open API. I'm frankly
> tired of this shit and there's no reason why a group of people can't
> come up with something equal if not better than JAF or JavaMail.
>
> > We have an open source project which we want to "mavenize" and offer
our own
> > remote repository to handle any dependencies not currently on ibiblio.
All
> > dependencies are covered under a BSD, Apache, LGPL or similar license
except
> > for a few Sun J2EE-related jar files. Sun's Binary Code License
Agreement
> > doesn't always allow for redistribution and even if it does that is
usually
> > only as "bundled as part of your Programs" which isn't really the case
if you
> > have the jar file accessable on a public maven repository.
>
> Right. You technically can't redistribute them for development purposes
> even though a couple people at Sun we talked to agreed that what Maven
> is acceptable though not technically allowed.
>
> > If we can't find open source equivalants, one option is to put a note
in the
> > release documentation notifying the user that they will have to
manually
> > download the dependency and place it in their local repository.
Perhaps a
> > better solution is to "bundle" the jar with the release and then use
the
> > maven.xml to auto-deploy the dependencies to the local repository, but
I'm not
> > certain if that properly meets Sun's licensing agreement.
>
> We can't bundle the non-dist JARs. It's obvious that these wouldn't be
> for a specific binary use. I am trying with Geir's help to lobby for the
> release of some of these JARs but it's getting very annoying and very
> tiresome.
>
> > Has anyone else faced this problem, and if so, any better ideas?
>
> I would just like to reimplement JAF and JavaMail, that's what I would
> really like to do. It's an easier position for me to take because I use
> as few Sun APIs as possible.
>
> > Thanks,
> > jaaron
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
> > http://search.yahoo.com
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
> --
> jvz.
>
> Jason van Zyl
> jason@zenplex.com
> http://tambora.zenplex.org
>
> In short, man creates for himself a new religion of a rational
> and technical order to justify his work and to be justified in it.
>
> -- Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
Re: licenses and repositories
Posted by Jason van Zyl <ja...@zenplex.com>.
On Tue, 2003-04-15 at 09:42, J Aaron Farr wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> Does anyone have a suggestion on how to handle dependencies which cannot be
> redistributed due to licensing, i.e. -- many of Sun's j2ee jar files?
You basically have to set up your own repository, or install them
manually.
I have started discussions with Geir and some folks at Sun but as per
usual things seem to have petered out. The first targets for free
distribution were JAF and JavaMail but that seems to be going no where.
This partly prompted me to make the change I did in maven-core (the new
maven stuff) to dump anything JAXP. If Sun is not going to support us
then I'm going to do everything not to support Sun and at every last
opportunity I will dump a Sun API in favour of an open API. I'm frankly
tired of this shit and there's no reason why a group of people can't
come up with something equal if not better than JAF or JavaMail.
> We have an open source project which we want to "mavenize" and offer our own
> remote repository to handle any dependencies not currently on ibiblio. All
> dependencies are covered under a BSD, Apache, LGPL or similar license except
> for a few Sun J2EE-related jar files. Sun's Binary Code License Agreement
> doesn't always allow for redistribution and even if it does that is usually
> only as "bundled as part of your Programs" which isn't really the case if you
> have the jar file accessable on a public maven repository.
Right. You technically can't redistribute them for development purposes
even though a couple people at Sun we talked to agreed that what Maven
is acceptable though not technically allowed.
> If we can't find open source equivalants, one option is to put a note in the
> release documentation notifying the user that they will have to manually
> download the dependency and place it in their local repository. Perhaps a
> better solution is to "bundle" the jar with the release and then use the
> maven.xml to auto-deploy the dependencies to the local repository, but I'm not
> certain if that properly meets Sun's licensing agreement.
We can't bundle the non-dist JARs. It's obvious that these wouldn't be
for a specific binary use. I am trying with Geir's help to lobby for the
release of some of these JARs but it's getting very annoying and very
tiresome.
> Has anyone else faced this problem, and if so, any better ideas?
I would just like to reimplement JAF and JavaMail, that's what I would
really like to do. It's an easier position for me to take because I use
as few Sun APIs as possible.
> Thanks,
> jaaron
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
> http://search.yahoo.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
--
jvz.
Jason van Zyl
jason@zenplex.com
http://tambora.zenplex.org
In short, man creates for himself a new religion of a rational
and technical order to justify his work and to be justified in it.
-- Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
Re: licenses and repositories
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@generationjava.com>.
On Tue, 15 Apr 2003, J Aaron Farr wrote:
> If we can't find open source equivalants, one option is to put a note in the
> release documentation notifying the user that they will have to manually
> download the dependency and place it in their local repository. Perhaps a
> better solution is to "bundle" the jar with the release and then use the
> maven.xml to auto-deploy the dependencies to the local repository, but I'm not
> certain if that properly meets Sun's licensing agreement.
>
> Has anyone else faced this problem, and if so, any better ideas?
Apache/Maven obviously have. With the decision being that there's not a
nice way around it. One idea that comes to mind is that it would be nice
if Maven had a User-Agent or something that looked like:
Maven-xmlwriter
in which the 'Maven' says it is Maven, and xmlwriter is the project
currently being built. Then you can block redistribution to any User-agent
but that one.
At that point, it seems to be akin to Java Webstart, and it seems unlikely
to me that the Sun licence would be applied to a use of Webstart to
redistribute things.
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org