Hi, How could a build *dependency* affect the license of the resulting binary?
Tom Eskil Abrahamsen Blomfeldt schrieb: > Francis Galiegue skrev: >> As I understand it, the community-port-to-4.6 branch is dedicated to >> the community. I therefore propose that the next-to-come >> qt-jambi-4.6.x depend on ant-contrib for the build process. Should the >> consensus turn out to be in favor of integrating it, I stress out the >> fact that I'll start integrating ant-contrib ONLY when I'm done with >> the build branch. >> > > If you are actually considering physically integrating the > ant-contrib.jar-file like before, please bear in mind the consequences > for the licensing of Qt Jambi. Ant-contrib is licensed under the Apache > license, which I believe is a GPL3-compatible license, but incompatible > with LGPL and GPL2. I may be wrong about this, but as far as I could > see, this is the case. Any user of Qt Jambi who currently depends on > either LGPL or GPL2 will thus not be able to use this branch of Qt > Jambi, as the new branch would have to be licensed under GPL version 3. > > The bottom line is that commercial users of Qt Jambi will not be able to > upgrade to the community version and therefore not to Qt 4.6, which I > would consider a significant downside. > > As long as ant-contrib is available on all supported platforms, I don't > mind adding a dependency on it for the community version, but I would > vote against adding the actual .jar-file to the repository. > > -- Eskil > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Qt-jambi-interest mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.trolltech.com/mailman/listinfo/qt-jambi-interest _______________________________________________ Qt-jambi-interest mailing list [email protected] http://lists.trolltech.com/mailman/listinfo/qt-jambi-interest
