Hi, > I see there's multiple issues in here, but do you agree that files like [1] > are dual licensed EPLv1 and EDLv1 (BSD-3-Clause) so can be included?
Normally when something is dual licensed you include which license you select in the LICENSE file. [1] EDL is Category A so if something was was EPL or EDL licensed then that would be fine. However I’m not 100% sure that the file is dual licensed in that you can select which license applies. From the header “ This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the terms of the Eclipse Public License v1.0 and Eclipse Distribution License v. 1.0 which accompanies this distribution.” to me that seems to be saying that parts of the content are under each license not that you can select a license. Note that the category B description also contains this text below, so it may be allowed on that basis. (Given that it’s very unlikely to change.) "For small amounts of source that is directly consumed by the ASF product at runtime in source form, and for which that source is unmodified and unlikely to be changed anyway (say, by virtue of being specified by a standard), inclusion of appropriately labeled source is also permitted. An example of this is the web-facesconfig_1_0.dtd, whose inclusion is mandated by the JSR 127: JavaServer Faces specification.” Thanks Justin 1. https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#mutually-exclusive --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
