Re: [Evolution-hackers] Evolution: Taking forward...

2008-07-11 Thread Paul Bolle
On Fri, 2008-07-11 at 04:21 -0600, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote:
 * The current licensing incompatibility issues of Evolution with
 Samba4/libmapi (GPLv3). Evolution needs to link with libmapi/samba4 
 for the new mapi based connector being developed for Exchange 2007.

[...]
 
 * Move Evolution licensing to  LGPL v2 and LGPL v3 to let us re-use
 the code more easily around the platform.

Did you mean LGPLv2 _or_ LGPLv3 here?

Anyway, I am not familiar with libmapi, but it does indeed seem to be
(what is commonly referred to as) a library that is licensed under the
GPLv3. According to the FSF you can't release a project under the LGPLv2
or LGPLv3 if you want to use a library under GPLv3. You'll have to
convert your LGPLv2 or LGPLv3 code to the GPLv3 [1]. So, if I'm reading
your plan and the FSF GPL faq correctly, your plan wouldn't work (as far
as libmapi is concerned).

Am I reading your plan and the faq correctly?

Regards,


Paul Bolle

[1] http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html#AllCompatibility

___
Evolution-hackers mailing list
Evolution-hackers@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers


Re: [Evolution-hackers] Evolution: Taking forward...

2008-07-11 Thread Michael Meeks
Hi Paul,

On Fri, 2008-07-11 at 15:30 +0200, Paul Bolle wrote:
  * Move Evolution licensing to  LGPL v2 and LGPL v3 to let us re-use
  the code more easily around the platform.
 
 Did you mean LGPLv2 _or_ LGPLv3 here?

Yes; it's dual licensed - which gives people rather a choice of
licenses, GPLv2, GPLv3, LGPLv2, LGPLv3 etc.

 Anyway, I am not familiar with libmapi, but it does indeed seem to be
 (what is commonly referred to as) a library that is licensed under the
 GPLv3. According to the FSF you can't release a project under the LGPLv2
 or LGPLv3 if you want to use a library under GPLv3. You'll have to
 convert your LGPLv2 or LGPLv3 code to the GPLv3 [1].

Sure - so, IANAL etc. however I don't see a problem with a LGPLv3 /
GPLv3 for the samba piece - I imagine, linking that in as a plugin makes
Evo, with the current structure as a whole GPLv3; but without it
potentially LGPLv2/GPLv2/LGPLv3 :-) AFAICS that gives some flexibility;
but of course it's possible there are yet further un-anticipated
problems ? :-) In the longer term, I'd prefer to see the samba piece
isolated into a separate process.

HTH,

Michael.

-- 
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]  , Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot


___
Evolution-hackers mailing list
Evolution-hackers@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers