Am 27.01.2009 um 14:56 schrieb Yavor Doganov:

On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 02:48:45PM +0100, Jonathan Schleifer wrote:
We do not ship with py-OpenSSL.
We do not include any of the code from py-OpenSSL.


I never said you did.

Then I fail to see the problem.

I don't see where we are violating any license.

You are violating your own license, the GPL.

I am where? Where do we distribute something that includes non-GPL code? Neither our source, nor our binaries include non-GPL code.

OpenSSL is loaded at runtime, but GPL doesn't cover which code is
allowed to be run in memory,

Please. All libraries you link against should be under a GPL- compatible
license.  The fact that you link with libssl via a python wrapper does
not alleviate that.

We only combine our code with OpenSSL's code in memory. This is perfectly legal, as the GPL only covers _DISTRIBUTION_. It's a license about _DISTRIBUTION_, _NOT_ about usage. That's why it's a _DISTRIBUTION_ license and not an EULA.

Additionally, GPL explicitely allows "mere aggregation", so even our
Windows binaries are no

This is not about mere aggregation at all.

It is, because all we do with the Windows binaries is have the OpenSSL DLLs included, which are loaded at runtime. So we do _NOT_ distribute any combined work. It is combined in memory. This is not covered by the GPL at all. Because GPL allows mere aggregation, it is allowed to include non-GPL'd stuff in the distribution set.

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/29c7588fbecproblem ,
as OpenSSL is a separate DLL which is loaded at runtime.

The link doesn't work for me

Yup, I broke it on pasting, see my second mail.

but the situation on POSIX systems is the
same -- when you do "import OpenSSL.SSL" and then use OpenSSL
facilities, they don't come from PyOpenSSL's independent SSL
implementation (as there isn't any), they come from libssl. So the .so
is loaded at runtime as well.

Right, it is loaded at runtime. So the combined work is created at _RUNTIME_, and _NOT_ at distribution. This isn't covered by the GPL at all. It doesn't say a single word that it's forbidden to combine GPL'd and non-GPL'd code in RAM.

--
Jonathan

Attachment: PGP.sig
Description: Signierter Teil der Nachricht

_______________________________________________
Gajim-devel mailing list
Gajim-devel@gajim.org
http://lists.gajim.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/gajim-devel

Reply via email to