If this bothers you, buy a Mac Mini, install WO and expose the jars
via Samba to your Windows machine :-)
But I agree - it is ridiculous that programmers have to go into such
trouble to interpret the stupid license.
"EOF references" in source code are definitely not controlled by the
Apple license (c'mon - do you seriously think that the day you
learned about NSArray, you soul belongs to Steve Jobs). Whether
*compiling* against WO jars is allowed under deployment license
(using javac and Eclipse) - that's not 100% clear, but I'd say it is.
Say I write a super dynamic WO application where a user enters WO
template code in runtime, typing it in a web form for later rendering
as a WO component... Or another WO app with some embedded scripting
language with expressions compiled in runtime against WO jars. With
modern Java, compilation is a de-facto part of deployment (IIRC in
Java 1.6 there will be public compiler API available in runtime).
Andrus
On Nov 16, 2005, at 3:50 PM, wolip..atos.de wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Andrus Adamchik" <andru..bjectstyle.org>
> To: <woproject-de..bjectstyle.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2005 1:20 PM
> Subject: Re: WO 5.3.1 licensing
>
>
>> In other words Apple can't prohibit anyone from typing arbitrary
>> character sequences in a text editor, even if such sequences happen
>> to be Java code that uses WebObjects API.
>>
>
> You said it: "IANAL". Dont you use the EOF references?
> Dont you use the WO frameworks for creating your HTML stuff?
> Server, etc...
>
> If you want to say you dont use WO, then remove WO from your
> computer and
> then type CHARs in a text editor.
>
> I use WO 5.2.2 on windows. I think using WO with the new license is
> illegal.
>
> Sako.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Wed Nov 16 2005 - 08:49:31 EST