Hello Shane,
Bacula is nearing the end of a development cycle and the next version will be
released in a matter of weeks, so I would like to revisit the problem that
recently came up with the Bacula license. My purpose is not to debate the
issues but rather come up with a plan forward for
Kern Sibbald wrote:
2. You recently mentioned to me that GPL v3 may be a solution. Like Linus, I
don't see any reason to switch to GPL v3, but if using GPL v3 makes Bacula
compatible with OpenSSL AND all distros are happy with that, it seems to me
to be an easy solution. I know that GPL v3
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Kern
Kern Sibbald wrote:
What I would like:
I would like Bacula to be able to be freely used by all distros without
licensing problems with any Open Source software including OpenSSL.
snip
1. Convert Bacula to use gnutls. One Debian user is
Anthony W. Youngman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Neil Williams
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
All the gnucash source code used in gpe-cash is GPLv2 or later.
The Gtk frontend for gpe-cash is GPLv3 or later. I am therefore
using my option to
On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 06:06:14PM +0200, Shane M. Coughlan wrote:
2. You recently mentioned to me that GPL v3 may be a solution. Like Linus,
I
don't see any reason to switch to GPL v3, but if using GPL v3 makes Bacula
compatible with OpenSSL AND all distros are happy with that, it
On Thursday 12 July 2007 18:06, Shane M. Coughlan wrote:
Hi Kern
Kern Sibbald wrote:
What I would like:
I would like Bacula to be able to be freely used by all distros without
licensing problems with any Open Source software including OpenSSL.
snip
1. Convert Bacula to use gnutls.
On Thursday 12 July 2007 18:06, Gervase Markham wrote:
Kern Sibbald wrote:
2. You recently mentioned to me that GPL v3 may be a solution. Like
Linus, I
don't see any reason to switch to GPL v3, but if using GPL v3 makes Bacula
compatible with OpenSSL AND all distros are happy with that,
Kern Sibbald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello Shane,
Bacula is nearing the end of a development cycle and the next version will
be
released in a matter of weeks, so I would like to revisit the problem that
recently came up with the Bacula license. My purpose
Le jeudi 12 juillet 2007 à 16:41 +0200, Kern Sibbald a écrit :
How do we get there?
It seems to me that there are a number of alternatives:
1. Convert Bacula to use gnutls. One Debian user is working on this, but it
is not a small nor an easy project. And though it is something I consider
Le jeudi 12 juillet 2007 à 20:18 +0200, Kern Sibbald a écrit :
It seems a real pity to me that the GPL is so restrictive -- it should make
my
life as a programmer easier, but it has in fact made it harder.
The main point of the GPL is not to make your life easier, but to
prevent your code
On Thursday 12 July 2007 22:52, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le jeudi 12 juillet 2007 à 16:41 +0200, Kern Sibbald a écrit :
How do we get there?
It seems to me that there are a number of alternatives:
1. Convert Bacula to use gnutls. One Debian user is working on this, but
it
is not a
On Thursday 12 July 2007 22:59, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le jeudi 12 juillet 2007 à 20:18 +0200, Kern Sibbald a écrit :
It seems a real pity to me that the GPL is so restrictive -- it should
make my
life as a programmer easier, but it has in fact made it harder.
The main point of the GPL
Le jeudi 12 juillet 2007 à 23:42 +0200, Kern Sibbald a écrit :
This flaw of the GPLv3 is at least good for something. If your GPL
software can now be included in the HP-UX or AIX distribution, it can
also be included in Debian.
Well, I don't consider the above a flaw. The flaw
On Friday 13 July 2007 01:31, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le jeudi 12 juillet 2007 à 23:42 +0200, Kern Sibbald a écrit :
This flaw of the GPLv3 is at least good for something. If your GPL
software can now be included in the HP-UX or AIX distribution, it can
also be included in Debian.
14 matches
Mail list logo
