This is dragging on a bit - while it is important in my
opinion. To resolve this you - perhaps give your PMC
some input as what you would like them to do:
-> Ask the board; my guess is that our answer will be;
not a derived work if we are talking about #include <...
and strict API use.
But I sure would like to know for sure that a ./configure && make
for bin releases by our volunteers which we distribute from the
ASF would pick this up by accident. So this may lead to a
--dist-build flag or something; or a script like the build one
on 1.3
-> Ask the board to ask the FSF - which is clearly
a double edged sword; as they have an oracle like
expectation to have their answer taken on face value.
-> Simply ignore it - it is not an issue.
-> Simply sidestep the issue and ditch gdbm (I personally prefer
Berkely DB et.al. anyway).
If you see some more possible paths going forward - add them - and
I suggest to have a few +1/-1's to guide your PMC.
Dw
