buildr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Caleb Powell" <caleb.pow...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Buildr dependencies
Date Mon, 11 Feb 2008 22:09:14 GMT
Cool. As I mentioned, it's really just some cleanup I've wanted to do
for awhile. I will let you  know as soon as it's done.

On Feb 11, 2008 4:06 PM, Assaf Arkin <arkin@intalio.com> wrote:
> On 2/10/08, Caleb Powell <caleb.powell@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm going to re-license the Antwrap library using the Apache Software
> > License so that it is compatible with Buildr. I feel the ASF license
> > is the most appropriate considering that Antwrap is a binding for
> > another Apache project.
> >
> > I was also planning on making some minor packaging changes to Antwrap
> > and improving the tests. But it may be that doing so will cause some
> > delays for you guys if you are planning a release. Would it be easier
> > for the Buildr project if I release a new version of Antwrap with the
> > ASF license (and no code changes), and then release a subsequent
> > version with code changes?
>
>
> I asked about this, but my sense so far is that it won't be a problem.
>  Since we're in incubation right now, the requirements are more relaxed, so
> we can do with the current release and just wait for the next version of
> Antwrap.
>
>
> Assaf
>
>
> Cheers!
> >
> > Caleb
> >
> > On Feb 6, 2008 6:18 PM, Matthieu Riou <matthieu@offthelip.org> wrote:
> > > Hi guys,
> > >
> > > I've just committed our NOTICE files and the licenses of the libraries
> > we
> > > depend on. For everybody to be on the same page, the policy regarding
> > > third-party dependencies at the ASF is roughly (at least for now):
> > >
> > >    - ASL, MIT, BSD are okay.
> > >    - CDDL, CPL, EPL, MPL are sort of okay but to be used with care
> > >    (additional warnings). Avoiding them altogether would be nice,
> > especially
> > >    given that we don't depend on any of these ATM. We're in a gray area
> > here
> > >    (the main difficult point being that you *always* distribute sources
> > in
> > >    Ruby).
> > >    - GPL, LGPL, BCL, Sleepycat and a few others are definitely not okay.
> > >
> > > As you may have noticed the Ruby license is not in the list. I've asked
> > some
> > > feedback on it but I don't anticipate big problems there, the Ruby
> > license
> > > itself (obviously we wouldn't choose the GPL) is fairly liberal even if
> > it
> > > has a few quirks.
> > >
> > > So provided that the Ruby License is fine, all our dependencies are
> > kosher
> > > except Antwrap (LGPL). We'll see what we can do there.
> > >
> > > From now on please keep the following in mind:
> > >
> > >    1. If you plan to add a hard dependency (not an optional feature) on
> > >    something and it's not licensed under ASL, MIT or BSD, please ask
> > here
> > >    first.
> > >    2. For all other open source projects you're involved in, think twice
> > >    before choosing a license and make the license choice and the
> > copyright
> > >    clear. Please. For the sanity of those who will use your stuff.
> > >
> > > Cheers!
> > >
> > > Matthieu
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Caleb
> >
> > "I do not know which makes a man more conservative—to know nothing but
> > the present, or nothing but the past."
> >   - John Maynard Keynes
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
> CTO, Intalio
> http://www.intalio.com
>



-- 
Caleb

"I do not know which makes a man more conservative—to know nothing but
the present, or nothing but the past."
  - John Maynard Keynes
Mime
View raw message