On Apr 12, 2007, at 3:03 PM, Adrian Wiesmann wrote:
> My problem is less in dual licencing our changes than in
> integrating the
> DataViews (which is Apache licence) into our own tool (which is
> GPL). But
> as far as I see nobody from Cayenne has a problem with us doing so and
> therefor I suggest that we integrate the DataView code into our own
> project (because this is easier for us to work on them) and when
> merging
> our changes with Cayenne we licence our changes under the Apache
> licence.
Adrian,
It would be very nice if we can get this going, but let's see if we
have all possible pitfalls covered.
There will be a one-time formality - all developers who will be
working on the code will need to send the CLA forms [1] to the ASF,
and also if the development is financed by your company, the company
will need to send a corporate CLA (also [1]). I don't expect this to
be a showstopper, but we need to discuss the following item.
Per recent discussion on Apache Legal list [2], it is NOT OK to take
Apache code and strip the license headers from it and relicense them
as GPL. Same goes for old ObjectStyle releases of DataViews (as
ObjectStyle license was an Apache license clone). The GPL/Apache
license incompatibility hurts everybody, but that's how things are
until ASF and FSF work it out :-(
So - is there any way you can continue using Apache-licensed
DataViews (as a library dependency or something? I am not a big
expert on GPL limitations)? This should be easier from the technical
POV as well, as you won't need to fork and resubmit patches to keep
Cayenne in sync.
Thanks
Andrus
[1] http://apache.org/licenses/
[2] http://tinyurl.com/2n8ft7
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Thu Apr 12 2007 - 07:49:42 EDT