--On Saturday, March 25, 2017 6:16 PM -0400 Theodore Ts'o
wrote:
And indeed, different Linux distributions have already come to
different conclusions with respect to various license compatibility
issues. (Examples: dynamically linking GPL programs with OpenSSL
libraries under
On Sat, 2017-03-25 at 21:48 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * James Bottomley:
>
> > On Sat, 2017-03-25 at 16:10 +, Salz, Rich via openssl-dev
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Please, in the final OpenSSL license text add the paragraph
> > > > linked in the above LLVM mailing list as an exception
On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 07:47:23PM +0100, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
> Unfortunately, dynamically linking is not a solution.
>
> My understanding is that the GPLv2 considers any library used by the
> GPLv2 program (it doesn't make a difference between dynamic or static
> linking) part of
> > The problem is that if it is distributed under the GPLv2 there is no
> > patent protection, and that is important to us.
>
> I've already told you once that this is a factually incorrect statement
> because
> (L)GPLv2 contains an implicit patent licence:
By patent protection, I mean "you
* James Bottomley:
> On Sat, 2017-03-25 at 16:10 +, Salz, Rich via openssl-dev wrote:
>>
>> > Please, in the final OpenSSL license text add the paragraph linked
>> > in the above LLVM mailing list as an exception to the Apache
>> > license.
>> >
>> > We should make sure using OpenSSL in
On Sat, 2017-03-25 at 16:10 +, Salz, Rich via openssl-dev wrote:
>
> > Please, in the final OpenSSL license text add the paragraph linked
> > in the above LLVM mailing list as an exception to the Apache
> > license.
> >
> > We should make sure using OpenSSL in GPLv2-only projects its
> >
On 25/03/17 17:10, Salz, Rich via openssl-dev wrote:
>
>> Please, in the final OpenSSL license text add the paragraph linked in the
>> above LLVM mailing list as an exception to the Apache license.
>>
>> We should make sure using OpenSSL in GPLv2-only projects its possible
>> without any trouble
> Please, in the final OpenSSL license text add the paragraph linked in the
> above LLVM mailing list as an exception to the Apache license.
>
> We should make sure using OpenSSL in GPLv2-only projects its possible
> without any trouble or concern for developers.
The problem is that if it is
On 23/03/17 21:04, Brian Smith wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm one of the people that received the email asking for permission to
> relicense code to the new license, Apache 2.0.
Same here.
> A major problem with
> the Apache 2.0 license is that it is frequently seen as being
> incompatible with the GPL2