Nelson Bolyard wrote:
Every few years, we re-investigate this issue. Last time, we came up empty.
Most DBs have licenses incompatible with MPL. I think the mozilla/NSS
developer community doesn't want NSS to depend on a DB that isn't as
readily reusable and redistributable as the rest of NSS is under MPL.
Just a note here: mozilla.org licensing policy (which may nor may not fit with the expectations of the NSS development community) is that anything which is under a subset of the MPL terms - such as libjpeg, and dbm, which are BSD-style licensed in the versions we use - is also permitted in the main tree.
Gerv,
AFAIK, no part of mozilla's source is presently licensed under terms that say, in effect, "it's OK to use this source in any product that you give away for free, but not OK to use this source in a product for which you charge." Do I have that right?
Would it be acceptable for some part of mozilla to depend on code that is licensed under terms like those? (I suspect not.)
FWIW, by "the mozilla/NSS developer community", I meant the entire set of
developers who use NSS in their products, which is (I believe) a larger
set than (a superset of) the set of developers who contribute to mozilla sources. All that means is: NSS is used in more products than just mozilla,
and the NSS developer community includes developers of all those products.
_______________________________________________ mozilla-crypto mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mozilla-crypto
