On Thu, 2003-05-29 at 19:10, Berin Loritsch wrote: > Its a neat idea, but GPL mixed with BCEL makes me shiver. If you > automatically alter my compiled code, does that mean I have to release > my code using GPL?
As the copyright holder we specifically make exceptions to the GPL where the instrumented application is either licensed under the GPL or licensed under an OSI license. Our licensing policy is described here: http://jcoverage.com/license.html. In no way is it our intention to prevent any OSI licensed application from being instrumented with the GPL version of jcoverage. Instrumenting an OSI licensed application with the GPL version of jcoverage does not cause that instrumented application to be licensed under the GPL. > If JCoverage is using BCEL, does that pose a problem for BCEL? I am no lawyer, I write code :), but my reading of http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#InterpreterIncompat, is that we can link with "GPL-incompatible" libraries, without causing that library to become GPL. As the copyright holder we can make exceptions to the GPL for such purposes, jcoverage is specifically designed to work with BCEL, log4j, junit, oro and getopt. > What about at the very least using LGPL? It is far lest strict. The principle reason for choosing the GPL is for revenue protection. While we are happy for any OSI licensed application to be instrumented with jcoverage, we do not want commercial licensed applications to be instrumented without having purchased the commercially licensed version of jcoverage. Regards, Peter. -- Peter Morgan jcoverage ltd +44 1423 526 426 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
