Joerg Barfurth writes: > James Carlson schrieb: > > The problem I have is that a couple of random components -- ones that > > are in Solaris today -- were removed from this project because the > > upgraded license is now considered to be unacceptable. > > > > If the issue is GPLv2 vs. GPLv3, then I misread the problem and agree to > your assessment.
Yes, that's the issue. > OTOH project teams that don't want to fight certain legal battles (or > lose them) may still be forced to submit something that was shaped by > legal considerations. In the present case this may mean staying with an > outdated version of the entire package or switching to an up to date > subset. Which of those will comply better with the directive you mention? I suspect the answer is "neither." Both answers are wrong, if we're trying to adhere to that directive. Jeff Cai writes: > ??? 2008-05-28??(Ig??(B 09:17 -0400$,3rl(BJames Carlson??????$,3rz(B > > So how do we handle this? What existing packaged software uses this > > library? Do we not care whether it breaks, or are we doing something > > to make sure it is all updated at the same time this library is > > updated? > Currently, $,3r_(BEvolution, Pidgin, Ekiga and Vino depend on it. These four > applications are all from JDS consolidation, therefore, they will be > re-built at the same time with GnuTLS. So long as we're _certain_ there are no others, and that these will all be updated at once, I'm ok with that answer. > > Just to clarify: in this case, "prefer" means that we ship something > > under the "GnuTLS" name on Solaris that is different from the > > same-named thing on Linux and lacks the capabilities available there. > > Correct? > Yes. We only ship the core library, which is the most important part of > GnuTLS. We're on a slippery slope when we start determining what parts are "important" and what parts are not, particularly when those determinations aren't made on the basis of anything technical about Solaris itself, but rather on Sun's local legal fears and doubts. As a Solaris matter, that's suspicious architecture. As an OpenSolaris matter, where Sun's legal judgement over GPLv3 is moot, it's a hard-to-defend answer. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking <james.d.carlson at sun.com> Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
