This seems like a great point to highlight and flush out... thanks for weighing in on this Jim.
Your read on the license mirrors my own. I too understood that the exclusions referred to packaging within Apache /projects/ and not necessarily software that is not part of a project but licensed under the Apache License 2.0. In this case the project was released under the Apache License 2.0 but was not part of an Apache Software Foundation project, so the guidance specified within http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html would not apply since it governs ASF projects. Ultimately I may have the camel-spring-amqp reviewed for re-release under MPL 1.1. VMware seems to enjoy releasing under that license at least. Jim Apperly wrote: > > There seems to be a little confusion about what the ASF permits re: > licensing. > > The ASF does explicitly forbid packaging ASL2 code with third party code > licensed under what they call "Category X" licenses. This includes things > like the GPL but definitely not the MPL. > > MPL1.1 - under which RabbitMQ is licensed - falls into ASF's "Category B" > list. Software under these licenses "may be included in binary form within > an Apache product if the inclusion is appropriately labeled". The > following link has more: > http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b > > It may also be worth pointing out that using the ASL2 does not require you > to contribute code to the ASF, therefore you can safely ignore them. > > I hope this helps to clear things up. > > Jim > RabbitMQ team > -- View this message in context: http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Writing-own-Camel-Components-tp4969523p4981357.html Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
