Re: RFS: ognl

2009-08-10 Thread Hendrik Weimer
Matthew Johnson writes: > I don't like: > > * 5. Products derived from this software may not be called > * "OpenSymphony" > *or "OGNL", nor may "OpenSymphony" or "OGNL" appear in their > *name, without prior written permission of the OpenSymphony > *Group. > > since we are, arguably,

Re: RFS: ognl

2009-08-09 Thread Damien Raude-Morvan
Le dimanche 09 août 2009 23:53:41, Matthew Johnson a écrit : > On Sun Aug 09 23:02, Damien Raude-Morvan wrote: > > > I've reviewed the package and it looks clean, but I have one question. > > > Which bit is licenced under the apache-derived licence? I can only find > > > BSD-licenced files. > > > >

Re: RFS: ognl

2009-08-09 Thread Russ Allbery
Matthew Johnson writes: > I don't like: > > * 5. Products derived from this software may not be called > * "OpenSymphony" > *or "OGNL", nor may "OpenSymphony" or "OGNL" appear in their > *name, without prior written permission of the OpenSymphony > *Group. > > since we are, arguably,

Re: RFS: ognl

2009-08-09 Thread Matthew Johnson
On Sun Aug 09 23:02, Damien Raude-Morvan wrote: > > I've reviewed the package and it looks clean, but I have one question. > > Which bit is licenced under the apache-derived licence? I can only find > > BSD-licenced files. > > OpenSymfony Licence (Apache derived one) is promoted by upstream as off