On Fri, 2007-09-07 at 20:15 +0930, Dan Shearer wrote: > On Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 08:13:42PM +0930, Dan Shearer wrote: > > > There are two small doors that could be left open for the future: Bacula > > could implement "or later version" in its forthcoming modified GPL, and > > OpenChange could dual-license its work with, say, the GPL. This would be > ^L
OpenChange links directly with GPLed (no L) code so making a small portion LGPL will change nothing, the whole work will still be GPL. To the Bacula team, I'd like to make them aware that OpenSSL is not the only SSL/TLS library, there are also NSS and GNUTLS, both these libraries are licensed under the GPL (NSS it tri-licensed), currently v2, but I am sure they will be GPLv3 compatible soon. So if OpenSSL is the only piece that requires you to add exceptions (and therefore makes you incompatible with any other GPL code) then you can easily substitute it with NSS or GNUTLS. Moreover, NSS is certified at a higher level of security than OpenSSL, and recently in RH we made some work to make a compatibility layer to make it easier to port OpenSSL applications to NSS. It would be really nice if bacula could be GPLv2+ without exceptions, it would have access to a larger body of code and chance to use directly libraries like the ones from openchange or libsmbclient instead of being forced to run scripts and try to interpret output. Simo. -- Simo Sorce Samba Team GPL Compliance Officer email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://samba.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Bacula-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-devel
