Jon Stevens wrote:
> -1
>
> I do not agree to this license for inclusion of ldap.jar in Tomcat 4.0
> final.
>
> 124 -rw-rw-r-- 1 jon wheel 123717 Sep 17 19:36 ldap.jar
>
> This is a similar license to the old Servlet API 2.0 license and I never
> agreed to that one for inclusion in Jserv on pretty much the same issues.
>
> There is no way in hell that I'm going agree to put the ASF (or myself) in a
> position to take responsibility for any legal claims that come up as a
> result of use of this .jar file. Carefully read supplemental section #2 (v).
>
Download tdk-2.1.tar.gz, unpack it, and search for JAR files -- you'll find some
interesting ones:
activation-1.0.1.jar
jndi-1.2.1.jar (which has an identical license to ldap.jar)
jdbc2_0-stdext.jar
jta1.0.1.jar
mail-1.2.jar
>
> There are several other Sun .jar files which are being distributed with
> Tomcat 4. I'm not sure what their licenses are for all of them, but this
> needs to be resolved.
>
All of the Java Software jar files included in the release have essentially the
same permission to redistribute binary JAR files (activation.jar, crimson.jar,
jaxp.jar, jdbc2_0-stdext.jar, jndi.jar, jta-spec1_0_1.jar, ldap.jar, mail.jar).
They are also available without preregistration via
<http://java.sun.com/products/>.
There is a compile-time dependency on JMX, but it is not included in the runtime
(it's only required if you want to integrate Tomcat into a management scheme via
JMX MBeans, the way that JBoss does). Download is behind a stupid registration
system (a matter of internal Sun discussion, but that's not relevant here).
I note in particular that Tomcat, along with *many* other Apache projects, have
been shipping JAXP binary JAR files (and even including them in their CVS
repositories) for a couple of years, in spite of the fact that the license terms
are identical.
>
> I think we should pull Tomcat 4 final off of the server ASAP.
>
Coming from someone who bragged (at his ApacheCon London session on Turbine)
about not caring about violating license agreements in what he shipped -- and
who apparently practices what he preaches -- this is a pretty ridiculous
attitude.
>
> thanks,
>
> -jon
>
Craig
