James Carlson schrieb: >> Note: >> The "extra" GnuTLS libraries -- which contains OpenPGP and TLS/IA >> support, LZO compression, the OpenSSL compatibility library -- >> and the self tests and command line tools are distributed under >> the GNU General Public License version 3.0 (or later), therefore, >> we remove them. > > Yikes. Subordinating system architecture and open source > compatibility to legal review seems like a long-term mistake. >
I think use of the GPL for libraries is a special case here, as would be use of any similarly 'viral' license, which places requirements on licensing of derived products [*]. If OpenSolaris exports an interface under such a license, it can be used by ISVs[**] only if they are willing to license their own software as prescribed. This means that such an interface would not be suitable as the only public interface to a piece of OpenSolaris functionality or as the replacement for an existing, generally usable interface. More generally it remains to be discussed if such interfaces should be offered as part of 'core' OpenSolaris interfaces - unless the community agrees upon a goal to incent third party software developers to adopt a particular license for their OpenSolaris based software by providing interfaces with such restrictions. This consideration makes 'viral' licensing an architectural concern. [*] Disclaimer: IANAL, but afaict that is a core feature of GPL in certain uses. Ask your lawyer, if you need actual legal advice on software licenses. [**] Or OpenSolaris developers for that matter... > Is anyone looking at this problem? Or will Open Solaris (despite the > best efforts of the Indiana team and the ARC "gang of four") just > drift away from Linux as more things become GPLv3? > Maybe we need a separate 'GPL licensed libraries and plugins' package repository outside the 'core OpenSolaris' one, just as much as we appear to need 'closed source bits and pieces' or 'other less well integrated software' repositories. In all cases the core architecture should be defined (IMHO) without reliance on any of these extra pieces of software. How much architectural effort should be spends on these extras appears to be an open issue. AFAICT use of GPLv3 in general is a different issue. IIRC Sun has already released sofware under that license, so it shouldn't be a problem per se. - J?rg -- Joerg Barfurth Software Engineer mailto:joerg.barfurth at sun.com Desktop Technology Thin Client Software http://www.sun.com/software/sunray/ Sun Microsystems GmbH http://www.sun.com/software/javadesktopsystem/
