commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Morgan Delagrange <>
Subject Re: [Graph2] nsUML license problem
Date Thu, 06 Feb 2003 00:28:55 GMT

--- wrote:
> There is a third option:
> 3) Remove graph2 from commons.

I wouldn't presume to do that on my own recognizance,
but if all the graph2 developers decided to go that
way, that would be fine.  Seems like overkill for the
sake of two classes, but I have no idea how important
they are to Maven or other dependant projects not
tracked by GUMP.  Removing graph2 from Commons still
may mean that it can't be used in other Jakarta
software, depending on how the board decides to
interpret the LGPL and viral licensing.

Don't shoot the messenger, I don't care one whit about
the holy wars.  In fact, the only reason I know what
license nsUML uses is because last week I researched
the project so I could have an informed opinion on how
to fix the GUMP build for graph, so we could make some
progress on Maven nightlies.

If after all the discussions are over, LGPL imports
turn out to be OK, then yay for us.  But a few months
ago somebody on the board mistakenly implicated the
Commons repository as a source of copyright
infringment.  At that time, we all discussed the issue
and agreed to be AS PROACTIVE AS POSSIBLE:

This is me being proactive.

- Morgan

Morgan Delagrange

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message