Programmers Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professional programmers interested in conceptual questions about software development. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

The Eclipse Public License is not entirely clear for me. As I understand it, anyone who redistributes a Library whose code is licensed under the EPL is considered to be a Contributor. It then states that you are not required to redistribute source-code but you must make mention of where to obtain it.

Other websites have said you do not need to release the source code of your project unless you specifically modify parts of the EPL-licensed program, but from reading the license, it seems to indicate otherwise.

If I would like to use Library X in my Java program where I link the library to my project via the Build Path and then redistribute Library X with my program, am I required to allow the obtaining of the source code or not, "Ask A Lawyer" advice aside.

share|improve this question
up vote 3 down vote accepted

The EPL license basically says:

  1. The software is authorized to be used with commercial, closed-source applications and derivative works. It is not copyleft; i.e. it doesn't compel you to release the source code of your closed-source application.

  2. You agree to use and distribute the software in such a way that it limits the liability of all contributors as much as possible.

  3. If you do distribute the source code, you do so in a manner that respects the terms of the Eclipse license, and readily identifies the original contributors. Generally speaking, this means retaining all of the original notices in the source code.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.