It may be on the GPL FAQ, but it is ultimately up to the project maintainers - which in this case is you :@)
The context of the GPL FAQ is for 3rd parties who develop binary-only modules that link to Open Source code. The holder of the copyright on the GPL'd product can give the blessing to 3rd party developers for binary-only modules. There is clear precedence of GPL'd projects granting access to binary-only modules - the Linux kernel comes to mind. 3rd parties are allowed to make binary-only modules - shared objects - that add functionality. This is done by Linus Torvalds specifically granting them permission to do so. The reason for needing specific permission is so that software companies cannot just hijack a free software project and add functionality w/o releasing code. However, copyright holders can grant specific permission to develop binary-only shared libraries. In this case, it hardly matters since it's all developed by SAP, so there's really nothing to fear in this specific case. However, by granting permission this time, you may set a precedent that allows other 3rd parties to develop binary-only modules that plug into SAPDB. I'm not sure on this, and I'll defer to someone more knowledgeable on the subject, but I just want to point out that there are possible ramifications from this. However, if this is not something that worries SAP, then it may be a moot point. Releasing binary-only modules that plug into an Open Source project seems to be one of the ways that software companies seek to generate revenue. SourceForge itself is an example of this, as our open edition is GPL'd, while the enterprise edition with proprietary modules is not. Hope this helps, JM On Monday 29 October 2001 01:45 am, Dittmar, Daniel wrote: > > something like fuzzy/word-stem searching available. Oracle offers > > something like ConText (now Intermedia) for quite some time. > > Although something similar is used for SAP projects, it is unclear if and > when this will be released as Open Source as well. > > And a binary only release seems to be out of question, as the GPL FAQ > states that loading a shared object is considered equivalent to static > linking, all such software thus has to be GPLed as well. > > Daniel Dittmar
