From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2568 invoked by alias); 13 Feb 2002 18:50:54 -0000 Mailing-List: contact sourcenav-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: sourcenav-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 2400 invoked from network); 13 Feb 2002 18:50:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cygnus.com) (205.180.230.5) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 13 Feb 2002 18:50:50 -0000 Received: from localhost.localdomain (cse.cygnus.com [205.180.230.236]) by runyon.cygnus.com (8.8.7-cygnus/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA03641; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 10:50:41 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 11:25:00 -0000 From: Ian Roxborough To: Robert Hartley Cc: MDavies@uk.waukbearing.com, sourcenav@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: SN backend GPL or LGPL? (was: SourceNav release...) Message-Id: <20020213104024.7ea3caeb.irox@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <3C6AB2A2.5121A504@ics.com> References: <50D13214B9CBD41180800008C7CFB62C45F4D5@AZTEC> <3C6AB2A2.5121A504@ics.com> Organization: Red Hat Inc. X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.6.5 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-q1/txt/msg00068.txt.bz2 On Wed, 13 Feb 2002 13:38:26 -0500 Robert Hartley wrote: > > What I was trying to ask is if we made the back end of SN a shared library, > libSNdb.so, would every thing that linked to this library have to be GPL'd or > would the library be able to be treated as a LGPL work? This would require a change to the licensing, which probably won't happen. Ian. > "Davies, Mike" wrote: > > > > What if we had some sort of Corba type middle ware that provided a > > > decent distributed API, without actually linking the code in. > > > Would any > > > application that connected to it still be bound by the GPL? > > > > Any changes you made to the Sourcenav Code would be GPLed and you would have > > to provide them in the usual ways, however it seems to me that any > > application that used the CORBA interface would be effectively dynamically > > linked to it and so might escape the GPL. > > > > > I am trying to find out here if there is any room for commercial > > > developers to contribute to SN. It would be a shame to let > > > it all go to > > > waste. > > > > Well, many commercial firms contribute to GPLed SW, there is nothing > > stopping you from doing that. If you are trying to make a proprietry > > version of SourceNav then this is prohibited by the licence. That is quite > > apart from the implications for the feelings of people who contributed their > > efforts freely for the common good. > > > > Mike Davies >