There is a lengthy discussion about the org.json license & Apache here:
https://lwn.net/Articles/707510/
There is a precursor to open-json that I've successfully used to test
the geode-web-api module described here:
http://stackoverflow.com/a/34418410/2171120
On 3/15/19 2:06 PM, Bruce Schuchardt wrote:
I've removed use of geode-json in non-test code and I'd like to remove
it completely and just add a dependency on a org.json package in a
Maven repository. The only one available is org.json though, so
here's the question: Is acceptable to use org.json with it's silly
license (see below) if we're not including it in our distribution?
Copyright (c) 2002 JSON.org
Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person
obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation
files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without
restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy,
modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies
of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is
furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:
The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be
included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
_*The Software shall be used for Good, not Evil.*_
THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND,
EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND
NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT
HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY,
WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM,
OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER
DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
Note: We can't use openjson, which is what geode-json is based on,
because it's packaged as com.github.openjson instead of org.json.
