incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Edward Capriolo <edlinuxg...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Toree's One Release Constraint
Date Fri, 20 May 2016 16:32:14 GMT
Yes if you are using a feature specific to a specific product it is obvious
even if you wrap cruft around it. however when I see something that uses
"rabbit mq" i generally think to wrap an interface around it so I can
replace with Apache Kafka :).I am wondering if the same be done here.

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 12:03 PM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com> wrote:

>
>
> On 5/20/16, 8:57 AM, "Edward Capriolo" <edlinuxguru@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >" You could argue that it makes the dependency optional"
> >Yes that is what I am saying. Like in a JDBC application you may be
> >connecting to postgres or mysql you are not concerned how those are
> >licensed because you are linked to the shim/driver. You could even bring
> >in
> >the Microsoft SQL server as a jar in this case.
>
> Right.  Then, AIUI,  the test is about "will" not "could".  What "will"
> the majority of your customer do?  If reality is that they will bring down
> the LGPL implementation you have not truly passed the "optional" test.
> The uber goal is to get away from having customers of Apache products
> worry about LGPL and other unfriendly licenses ending up on their system.
>
> -Alex
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message