Peter Donald wrote:
> At 09:45 30/10/00 +0100, you wrote:
> >Peter Donald wrote:
> >> Nope APL doesn't care. It brakes the GPL if tomcat is included. Tomcat can
> >> virtually not be in the same VM or else you are breaking the GPL.
>[snip]
> >Please note that section 0 of the GPL clearly states
> >that activities other than copying, distribution and
> >modification are outside the scope of the GPL.
> >So GPL cannot make restrictions on what a user does
> >when he does not copy, distribute or modify.
> >I do not think that loading Tomcat into a VM that
> >has jBoss loaded come under any of these three terms.
>
> but the code to do the loading will.
You are talking about jBoss being hardcoded to start
Tomcat here?
I agree this is a problem, but fixing this problem is
IMO not.
Now assuming we have already fixed this problem, do
you think there would be other problems with having
jBoss and Tomcat loaded in the same VM ?
> >> 3 is violated all the way through jBoss with JAAS, JTA, (EJB ?), JMX,
> (JMS?)
> >
> >Yes. I agree that we must get rid of the violations.
>
> the question I ask is - Is it possible ?
I think it is, but it depends on what is considered
"platform code" on the Java platform.
> Considering you are writing an EJB
> server and EJB package is a violation I would say - no it is not possible
> with vanilla GPL.
I guess you are talking about the EJB system classes
and interfaces as distributed by Sun in file ejb.jar.
These are all in javax.ejb.*, so if javax.* code is
considered "platform code" there should be no problem
with this.
Similar arguments for JTA and JMX.
Haven't checked JAAS and JMS, but I would be surprised
if they are not also in javax.*.
> You may be able to modify it to come to acceptable terms
> thou that means having a lot of knowledge about legalities or using a
> canned modification (as given by GNU).
>
> The reason is that you can not arbitrarly modify the GPL because GNU does
> not give you permission - and they own the license (ie it is not a public
> domain license).
Yes. The GPL document is copyrighted, no permission is
given to modify, and just to be sure they explicitly
noted that changing it is forbidden.
IMO that is a Good Thing.
This is why it is always amended rather than modified.
But amending it is also problematic, for reasons
already discussed.
If possible we should try to avoid amendments.
It seems to me that we are getting close to the point
where we know what the problems are and what should
be done about it.
This is to a large extent due to your most valuable
help.
But there are still a few open ends, most notably
the (IMHO very important) definition of "platform
code" for the Java platform. I remember there used
to be a GNU mailing list for discussing questions
about the GPL, but I cannot remember the name of it.
Taking the question of "platform code" for the Java
platform to such a mailing list might be a good
idea.
Do you have the name of the list?
Best Regards,
Ole Husgaard.
