The 7.1 java api includes the RemoteTea ONC/RPC library, which is released in the GNU GPL v2 or later. The GPL license requires that the source of any software that distributes this library have it's source made publicly available.
The software in question (oncrpc.jar): http://remotetea.sourceforge.net/ http://remotetea.sourceforge.net/javadoc/org/acplt/oncrpc/server/package-summary.html [EMAIL PROTECTED] /usr/ar/sundev71/api/lib]$ jar -tvf oncrpc.jar 0 Wed Aug 22 19:16:16 EDT 2007 META-INF/ 106 Wed Aug 22 19:16:14 EDT 2007 META-INF/MANIFEST.MF 0 Wed Aug 22 19:16:12 EDT 2007 org/ 0 Wed Aug 22 19:16:12 EDT 2007 org/acplt/ 0 Wed Aug 22 19:16:14 EDT 2007 org/acplt/oncrpc/ ... The classes distributed in oncrpc.jar, which are included with arserver, are obviously part of the GPL licensed software. While all Java classes are dynamically loaded at runtime, directly referenced classes are also used at compile time, and thus might be considered in violation of the GPL. Am I missing something here? Some commentary on the subject: http://www.stylusstudio.com/xmldev/200411/post40360.html http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/lgpl-java.html http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-java.html http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-java-faq/ch5.html#s5.3.4 http://www.stylusstudio.com/xmldev/200411/post80430.html To quote the first link: "It has always been the FSF's position that dynamically linking applications to libraries creates a single work derived from both the library code and the application code. The GPL requires that all derivative works be licensed under the GPL, an effect which can be described as "hereditary." So, if an application links to a library licensed under the GPL, the application too must be licensed under the GPL. By contrast, libraries licensed under the GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL) may be linked to proprietary applications. ... The typical arrangement for Java is that each library an application uses is distributed as a separate JAR (Java Archive) file. Applications use Java's "import" functionality to access classes from these libraries. When the application is compiled, function signatures are checked against the library, creating a link. The application is then generally a derivative work of the library. So, the copyright holder for the library must authorize distribution of the work. The LGPL permits this distribution." Seeking feedback from people that are a bit more knowledgeable on the subject. Axton Grams _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
