Hello, To follow up on this: as of 5 September, Bacula source code is free of third party copyrighted code that is GPLed. Doing so, did unfortunately create a good deal of instability, which we are dealing with. However, for the future (probably version 3.0.0), we will be able to use OpenSSL code without any license infringements.
As far as I can see, the project has the following ways to proceed: 1. Add a modification to our existing license that permits linking with OpenSSL. 2. Add a modification to our existing license that permits linking with any OSI software. 3. Dual licensing Bacula with GPLv2 and some other license that permits linking with OpenSSL. 4. Switching from GPLv2 to some other license that permits linking with OpenSSL. I would be interested in your opinions on which way we should go, and if anyone has any suggestions for the wording for item #1 above, it certainly seems to me to be the minimalist way of proceeding for at least the moment. The old text that I had some time ago, which probably goes under possibility #2 was: Linking: Bacula may be linked with any libraries permitted under the GPL, or with any non-GPLed libraries, including OpenSSL, that are required for its proper functioning, providing the source code of those non-GPLed libraries is non-proprietary and freely available to the public. Best regards, Kern -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
