Which license to use for Xerces 2.5.0?

[Nauman Hameed]

Hi

I am using Xerces C++ Parser, Version 2.5.0 as part of my product. The license file included with the version 2.5.0 distribution contains Apache Software License, Version 1.1. However, I notice that the current license version is Apache Software License, Version 2.0. Should I distribute the Xerces C++ binaries with my software under license version 1.1 or 2.0?

Regards
Nauman

[Sebastian 'CrashandDie' Lauwers]

On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 10:37 AM, Nauman Hameed
<nhameed@...> wrote:
> Hi
>
> I am using Xerces C++ Parser, Version 2.5.0 as part of my product. The license file included with the version 2.5.0 distribution contains Apache Software License, Version 1.1. However, I notice that the current license version is Apache Software License, Version 2.0. Should I distribute the Xerces C++ binaries with my software under license version 1.1 or 2.0?

No, at least, I don't think so.

A given software version should always be distributed with the license
it was distributed with in the first place. I (very) quickly went over
the license, and saw nothing about version evolution, so I'd stick
with the 1.1 one.

Can anyone else confirm this ?

S.

--
question = ( to ) ? be : ! be;
 -- Wm. Shakespeare

[Nauman Hameed]

Hi S

Thanks for the information.

Regards
Nauman

----- Original Message -----
From: "Sebastian 'CrashandDie' Lauwers" <crashanddie@...>
To: <c-users@...>
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 3:35 PM
Subject: Re: Which license to use for Xerces 2.5.0?

> On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 10:37 AM, Nauman Hameed
> <nhameed@...> wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> I am using Xerces C++ Parser, Version 2.5.0 as part of my product. The
>> license file included with the version 2.5.0 distribution contains Apache
>> Software License, Version 1.1. However, I notice that the current license
>> version is Apache Software License, Version 2.0. Should I distribute the
>> Xerces C++ binaries with my software under license version 1.1 or 2.0?
>
> No, at least, I don't think so.
>
> A given software version should always be distributed with the license
> it was distributed with in the first place. I (very) quickly went over
> the license, and saw nothing about version evolution, so I'd stick
> with the 1.1 one.
>
> Can anyone else confirm this ?
>
> S.
>
> --
> question = ( to ) ? be : ! be;
> -- Wm. Shakespeare
>
>

[Dennis Endt]

Hi,

yesterday I tried to integrate the Sax2 Parser into my Project. I looked
at the original example on the Homepage and also derivated my class from
DefaultHandler.

Actually this works fine, I`m getting no errors.

But,and this is the problem, the Parser doesn`t walk into my overloaded
method "startElement".

I could show my Code, but it is just a 1:1 copy from the example code on
the Homepage.

What could be the failure?

Greetings,
D.E.

[David Bertoni]

Dennis Endt wrote:

> Hi,
>
> yesterday I tried to integrate the Sax2 Parser into my Project. I looked
> at the original example on the Homepage and also derivated my class from
> DefaultHandler.
>
> Actually this works fine, I`m getting no errors.
>
> But,and this is the problem, the Parser doesn`t walk into my overloaded
> method "startElement".
>
> I could show my Code, but it is just a 1:1 copy from the example code on
> the Homepage.
>
> What could be the failure?

The example code is out of date if you're working from the trunk.  You
can verify this if you compare the signatures of
DefaultHandler::startElement() and your derived member function.

What version of Xerces-C are you using?

Dave