×××× ××××× 21 ××××× 2004, 16:18, ×××× ×× ××× JÃrg Pommnitz:
> The problem is that it is unclear whether Kannel can remain Apache/BSD-free
> when it references the newer MySQL libraries. Avoiding the GPL question at
> all is the safest way. If the GPL avoiding solution is technical superior
> to the previous one (e.g. wider choice of DBMS), then this is even better.
Sorry to barge in, but I think you all miss the point. IANAL, but I've done
some extendsive research into this and similar problems and currently my
official standing (and you can quote me, but again - I'm not legally
qualified to make such assertions so it's still your risk) regarding GPL is
that it allows you to combine GPL code with any open source code using a "GPL
compatible" license. that means as long as the Kannel license it GPL
compliant it should be ok to link it directly against GPL code.
GPL compatibility is cleary described in the GPL itself as any terms that do
not limit the freedom of the user any more GPL does. it is widely accepted
that a BSD Style and Apache Style licenses are less limiting then the GPL and
are hence GPL compatible.
Also - as long as Kannel does not distribute mysql sources, and it can be
compiled against 3.x versions of MySQL as well as 4.x, and is compatible with
3.x libraries (are those LGPL ?) then Kannel people should not worry too much
about it as the burden of license compatability lies with the person who
distributes binary packages and MySQL explicitly allows you to use it in
proprietry commercial environments under the GPL license as long as it is not
re-ditributed or advertised.
--
Oded Arbel
m-Wise mobile solutions
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
+972-9-9581711 (116)
+972-67-340014
::..
gossip, n.:
Hearing something you like about someone you don't.
