That is actually good news since we use JAXB, so someone in legal must be
okay with the CDDL :)
Brian
>
> On Apr 30, 2010, at 6:18 PM, James Strachan wrote:
>
>> On 30 April 2010 16:45, <brian_at_reindel.com> wrote:
>>> I just had an interesting conversation with our product development
>>> team,
>>> and asked why on a recent project they chose Spring MVC for
>>> request/response handling over Jersey, or if they had completed an
>>> evaluation. The problem apparently is that GPL is not a business
>>> friendly
>>> (for our business) license, in that it requires derivative works to
>>> be GPL
>>> as well? We implement a paid source product with a custom license,
>>> and
>>> apparently we've had issues with other GPL licensed APIs, and are now
>>> limited to LGPL, Apache, BSD and a few others. Can someone speak to
>>> this
>>> more? I want to use Jersey to put in a REST abstraction, and it
>>> would suck
>>> if I can't because of a license discrepancy.
>>
>> You can use the CDDL license which is fine. Many folks already use
>> CDDL stuff already without realising it (e.g. many
>> web/web-service/rest stuff including Spring uses JAXB which is CDDL
>> for example).
>>
>
> Right. CDDL is often misunderstood.
>
> You can choose CDDL or GPL as per your requirements.
>
>
>> It would be easier if Jersey were Apache License though... :)
>> /me ducks...
>>
>
> I agree /me ducks too... But i do not make the decisions on this :-)
>
> Paul.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_jersey.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_jersey.dev.java.net
>
>