Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 16:59:48 +0300 From: Panagiotis Astithas <past@ebs.gr> To: "Arne H. Juul" <arnej@pvv.ntnu.no> Cc: freebsd-java@freebsd.org, kurt@intricatesoftware.com Subject: Re: jdk15 from update5 sources Message-ID: <4461F1D4.4040603@ebs.gr> In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0605081505570.30944@decibel.pvv.ntnu.no> References: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0605041437150.29744@decibel.pvv.ntnu.no> <20060504162514.GB1336@misty.eyesbeyond.com> <445B19DF.2090308@ebs.gr> <200605051149.19715.lists@intricatesoftware.com> <445CDFDB.5020901@ebs.gr> <Pine.LNX.4.62.0605081505570.30944@decibel.pvv.ntnu.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[I seem to have forgotten this in my drafts folder...] Arne H. Juul wrote: > On Sat, 6 May 2006, Panagiotis Astithas wrote: >> >> The most important thing however is that if this is a correct >> interpretation of the situation, then the posted patches cannot be >> used, since AFAICT they were created against JIUL-licensed sources. > > since the source code I looked at is released under *both* JRL and JIUL I > don't think this is a problem if you want to work under either of those > licenses. I'm not sure if I understand the reasoning behind the JIUL > faq answer 16, maybe it's targeted to bigger modifications (libraries, > new language features) where the author would like to have their *own* > copyright and license. Small "porting" patches like the ones I've > posted should be compatible with both JRL and JIUL as far as I can tell > from reading both the actual licenses, at least as long as I'm willing > to give them away without any extra restrictions from my side. This assumes of course that you have already accepted the JRL, by clicking through the source download, before sharing your patches under this license. I'm not suggesting that you haven't, just (for the record) noting that it is necessary. Cheers, Panagiotis
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4461F1D4.4040603>