Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
--On Monday, February 28, 2011 11:32 PM -0500 Victor Duchovni victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com wrote: On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 09:22:52PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote: With Debian, if I need mysql support I simply install the extra package postfix-mysql, which depends on libmysqlclient. (This is the same procedure for acquiring pgsql, pcre, cdb, ldap, etc capability) So by installing the package postfix-mysql and libmysqlclient, am I violating a license agreement? If not, what's the difference, and why? This is a legal question. The postfix-mysql loadable object links Postfix table driver code available under the IPL against the MySQL shared library. Whether this is allowed under the MySQL license is not completely clear. It is not a problem with Postgres or LDAP. After filing a bug with RedHat about their GPL violation, they got on the phone with Oracle, and Oracle updated the MySQL FOSS exception list to include IBM Public License 1.0. So this is no longer a problem for anyone. --Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Sr. Member of Technical Staff Zimbra, Inc A Division of VMware, Inc. Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
Quanah Gibson-Mount: After filing a bug with RedHat about their GPL violation, they got on the phone with Oracle, and Oracle updated the MySQL FOSS exception list to include IBM Public License 1.0. So this is no longer a problem for anyone. Thanks. That is one less thing to worry about. Wietse
Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
mouss wrote: Le 01/03/2011 11:25, Matthias Andree a écrit : Am 28.02.2011 23:57, schrieb Quanah Gibson-Mount: The main issue I see at the moment really is the inability to legally link Postfix to MySQL, removing a valuable piece of Postfix functionality. Not a loss. If MySQL and Postfix turn out to be incompatible license-wise, this prevents one particular SQL *implementation* from being used - but not the functionality (SQL lookups) per se. If you cannot or do not want to use MySQL due to licensing, use PostgreSQL. It not only removes the license worries [1], but also worries around table storage engines, transactional modes, and ACID compliance. [1] http://www.postgresql.org/about/licence fully agreed. I started moving out of mysql after oracle acquistion. and I'm pushing for the same move at $dayjob and beyond. Looks like what Oracle wanted is working.
Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
On 2011-03-02 5:10 PM, mouss wrote: Le 01/03/2011 10:09, Ralf Hildebrandt a écrit : MariaDB is a database server that offers drop-in replacement functionality for MySQL. MariaDB is built by some of the original authors of MySQL, with assistance from the broader community of Free and open source software developers. In addition to the core functionality of MySQL, MariaDB offers a rich set of feature enhancements including alternate storage engines, server optimizations, and patches. seems promissing, but a fork like that requires a year or so to see what gets out of it. so either the guys are very good and they'll get out with a great success, or the project will die. It's already been well over a year since it was forked. The announcement was made in May of 2009, and the first release version was in February of 2010... http://monty-says.blogspot.com/2010/03/time-flies-one-year-of-mariadb.html -- Best regards, Charles
Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
Le 03/03/2011 15:39, Randy Ramsdell a écrit : mouss wrote: Le 01/03/2011 11:25, Matthias Andree a écrit : Am 28.02.2011 23:57, schrieb Quanah Gibson-Mount: The main issue I see at the moment really is the inability to legally link Postfix to MySQL, removing a valuable piece of Postfix functionality. Not a loss. If MySQL and Postfix turn out to be incompatible license-wise, this prevents one particular SQL *implementation* from being used - but not the functionality (SQL lookups) per se. If you cannot or do not want to use MySQL due to licensing, use PostgreSQL. It not only removes the license worries [1], but also worries around table storage engines, transactional modes, and ACID compliance. [1] http://www.postgresql.org/about/licence fully agreed. I started moving out of mysql after oracle acquistion. and I'm pushing for the same move at $dayjob and beyond. Looks like what Oracle wanted is working. I don't understand what you are trying to say, but most importantly I don't care for what Oracle wanted. if they acquired mysql, it's because mysql guys agreed. same for sleepycat. it's becoming common for people to go open source to get a community of users, then go commercial.
Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
--On Tuesday, March 01, 2011 10:06 AM +0100 Ralf Hildebrandt ralf.hildebra...@charite.de wrote: * Quanah Gibson-Mount qua...@zimbra.com: Sorry, I apologize. Particularly as someone who sees my own name often misspelled. ;) What is the origin of Quanah? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quanah_Parker No relation, and I have no known Native American blood. But my parents were impressed by him and his accomplishments. position. I don't care if one flavor of you must release source code is better than another flavor. If I had the choice it then would be the same BSD licence that I slapped on my older tools. The main issue I see at the moment really is the inability to legally link Postfix to MySQL, removing a valuable piece of Postfix functionality. Wasn't there also an issue with OpenSSL (at least it has been mentioned some time ago on this list). I don't know. Certainly possible. I also think that the flavor option has some importance. If it allows Postfix to be more widely used in a way that is comfortable to IBM, then I think that is a good thing. Agreed. I do know that some RedHat releases had no maptype mysql (because of this?) No idea. --Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Sr. Member of Technical Staff Zimbra, Inc A Division of VMware, Inc. Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
Le 01/03/2011 11:25, Matthias Andree a écrit : Am 28.02.2011 23:57, schrieb Quanah Gibson-Mount: The main issue I see at the moment really is the inability to legally link Postfix to MySQL, removing a valuable piece of Postfix functionality. Not a loss. If MySQL and Postfix turn out to be incompatible license-wise, this prevents one particular SQL *implementation* from being used - but not the functionality (SQL lookups) per se. If you cannot or do not want to use MySQL due to licensing, use PostgreSQL. It not only removes the license worries [1], but also worries around table storage engines, transactional modes, and ACID compliance. [1] http://www.postgresql.org/about/licence fully agreed. I started moving out of mysql after oracle acquistion. and I'm pushing for the same move at $dayjob and beyond.
Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
Le 01/03/2011 10:09, Ralf Hildebrandt a écrit : * Victor Duchovni victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com: This is a legal question. The postfix-mysql loadable object links Postfix table driver code available under the IPL against the MySQL shared library. Whether this is allowed under the MySQL license is not completely clear. It is not a problem with Postgres or LDAP. I'm wondering if MariaDB (which is the fork of MySQL) could solve the problems: http://kb.askmonty.org/v/mariadb-license#mariadb-client-license http://mariadb.org/ MariaDB is a database server that offers drop-in replacement functionality for MySQL. MariaDB is built by some of the original authors of MySQL, with assistance from the broader community of Free and open source software developers. In addition to the core functionality of MySQL, MariaDB offers a rich set of feature enhancements including alternate storage engines, server optimizations, and patches. seems promissing, but a fork like that requires a year or so to see what gets out of it. so either the guys are very good and they'll get out with a great success, or the project will die.
Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
* mouss mo...@ml.netoyen.net: seems promissing, but a fork like that requires a year or so to see what gets out of it. so either the guys are very good and they'll get out with a great success, or the project will die. Yes. Promising, to say the least. -- Ralf Hildebrandt Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin Campus Benjamin Franklin Hindenburgdamm 30 | D-12203 Berlin Tel. +49 30 450 570 155 | Fax: +49 30 450 570 962 ralf.hildebra...@charite.de | http://www.charite.de
Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
* Quanah Gibson-Mount qua...@zimbra.com: Sorry, I apologize. Particularly as someone who sees my own name often misspelled. ;) What is the origin of Quanah? position. I don't care if one flavor of you must release source code is better than another flavor. If I had the choice it then would be the same BSD licence that I slapped on my older tools. The main issue I see at the moment really is the inability to legally link Postfix to MySQL, removing a valuable piece of Postfix functionality. Wasn't there also an issue with OpenSSL (at least it has been mentioned some time ago on this list). I also think that the flavor option has some importance. If it allows Postfix to be more widely used in a way that is comfortable to IBM, then I think that is a good thing. Agreed. I do know that some RedHat releases had no maptype mysql (because of this?) -- Ralf Hildebrandt Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin Campus Benjamin Franklin Hindenburgdamm 30 | D-12203 Berlin Tel. +49 30 450 570 155 | Fax: +49 30 450 570 962 ralf.hildebra...@charite.de | http://www.charite.de
Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
* Stan Hoeppner s...@hardwarefreak.com: With Debian, if I need mysql support I simply install the extra package postfix-mysql, which depends on libmysqlclient. (This is the same procedure for acquiring pgsql, pcre, cdb, ldap, etc capability) Yes, but this functionality (splitting out maptypes) has been PATCHED into Postfix. -- Ralf Hildebrandt Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin Campus Benjamin Franklin Hindenburgdamm 30 | D-12203 Berlin Tel. +49 30 450 570 155 | Fax: +49 30 450 570 962 ralf.hildebra...@charite.de | http://www.charite.de
Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
* Victor Duchovni victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com: This is a legal question. The postfix-mysql loadable object links Postfix table driver code available under the IPL against the MySQL shared library. Whether this is allowed under the MySQL license is not completely clear. It is not a problem with Postgres or LDAP. I'm wondering if MariaDB (which is the fork of MySQL) could solve the problems: http://kb.askmonty.org/v/mariadb-license#mariadb-client-license http://mariadb.org/ MariaDB is a database server that offers drop-in replacement functionality for MySQL. MariaDB is built by some of the original authors of MySQL, with assistance from the broader community of Free and open source software developers. In addition to the core functionality of MySQL, MariaDB offers a rich set of feature enhancements including alternate storage engines, server optimizations, and patches. -- Ralf Hildebrandt Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin Campus Benjamin Franklin Hindenburgdamm 30 | D-12203 Berlin Tel. +49 30 450 570 155 | Fax: +49 30 450 570 962 ralf.hildebra...@charite.de | http://www.charite.de
Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
Am 01.03.2011 10:06, schrieb Ralf Hildebrandt: Agreed. I do know that some RedHat releases had no maptype mysql (because of this?) seems so for fedora i had to take the srpm and rebuild it with mysql-support which can be enabled in the SPEC-file but is not enabled in binary builds i think this is a godd solution because they must not think about possible licensce problems and a user who need it really can rebuild the srpm within 5 minutes signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
Am 28.02.2011 23:57, schrieb Quanah Gibson-Mount: The main issue I see at the moment really is the inability to legally link Postfix to MySQL, removing a valuable piece of Postfix functionality. Not a loss. If MySQL and Postfix turn out to be incompatible license-wise, this prevents one particular SQL *implementation* from being used - but not the functionality (SQL lookups) per se. If you cannot or do not want to use MySQL due to licensing, use PostgreSQL. It not only removes the license worries [1], but also worries around table storage engines, transactional modes, and ACID compliance. [1] http://www.postgresql.org/about/licence
Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
Zitat von Matthias Andree matthias.and...@gmx.de: Am 28.02.2011 23:57, schrieb Quanah Gibson-Mount: The main issue I see at the moment really is the inability to legally link Postfix to MySQL, removing a valuable piece of Postfix functionality. Not a loss. If MySQL and Postfix turn out to be incompatible license-wise, this prevents one particular SQL *implementation* from being used - but not the functionality (SQL lookups) per se. If you cannot or do not want to use MySQL due to licensing, use PostgreSQL. It not only removes the license worries [1], but also worries around table storage engines, transactional modes, and ACID compliance. [1] http://www.postgresql.org/about/licence :-) This will get you into flame-wars for sure... Andreas smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
--On Friday, February 25, 2011 11:02 PM -0800 Quanah Gibson-Mount qua...@zimbra.com wrote: The MySQL FOSS exception, however, does not broadly include all OSI licenses. Victor, Thanks for the information, very useful. I would be particularly curious to know if Postfix is now licensed under the CPL rather than the IPL. Would Wietse need to confirm that? So, since the mysql exception does not include the IPL, then it seems that making it possible to link postfix against the mysql libraries puts others in a bind if they want the functionality, given the incompatibility between the two licenses. Wieste, will postfix be moving to the CPL, or will it be retaining the IPL? Thanks, Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Sr. Member of Technical Staff Zimbra, Inc A Division of VMware, Inc. Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
Quanah Gibson-Mount: qua...@zimbra.com wrote: The MySQL FOSS exception, however, does not broadly include all OSI licenses. Victor, Thanks for the information, very useful. I would be particularly curious to know if Postfix is now licensed under the CPL rather than the IPL. Would Wietse need to confirm that? So, since the mysql exception does not include the IPL, then it seems that making it possible to link postfix against the mysql libraries puts others in a bind if they want the functionality, given the incompatibility between the two licenses. Wieste, will postfix be moving to the CPL, or will it be retaining the IPL? The IPL is the second license under which Postfix was released. With IPL and CPL being similar in spirit (and equally objectionable for OpenBSD, according to people I talked to) I need to hear good arguments before I would enter further discussion with IBM lawyers. Wietse
Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
--On Monday, February 28, 2011 3:37 PM -0500 Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote: Wieste, will postfix be moving to the CPL, or will it be retaining the IPL? The IPL is the second license under which Postfix was released. With IPL and CPL being similar in spirit (and equally objectionable for OpenBSD, according to people I talked to) I need to hear good arguments before I would enter further discussion with IBM lawyers. Hi Wieste, I see that the CPL has in fact been replaced with the EPL. Do the BSD folks find it as objectionable as well? If not, then if you do look into re-licensing postfix, perhaps the EPL would be a better solution. The general argument in favor of re-licensing postfix that I see is that the EPL in particular is seen as more friendly, OSS wise, by other groups, even if not by the BSD folks. Certainly allowing postfix to be linked against the MySQL libraries without engendering a license violation is a significant positive. Postfix is highly used among various linux distributions (Debian, Ubuntu, SuSE, RedHat all come to mind), but with the exception of Redhat, none of them link postfix against the MySQL libraries by default. I appreciate you taking the time to ponder what I am sure is quite a arduous task, even if you decide against going forward with it. Regards, Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Sr. Member of Technical Staff Zimbra, Inc A Division of VMware, Inc. Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
Quanah Gibson-Mount: Wieste, will postfix be moving to the CPL, or will it be retaining the IPL? The IPL is the second license under which Postfix was released. With IPL and CPL being similar in spirit (and equally objectionable for OpenBSD, according to people I talked to) I need to hear good arguments before I would enter further discussion with IBM lawyers. Hi Wieste, Please, spell my name correctly. Thank you. I see that the CPL has in fact been replaced with the EPL. Do the BSD folks find it as objectionable as well? If not, then if you do look into re-licensing postfix, perhaps the EPL would be a better solution. I don't run to the IP laywers for each iteration of the IBM license agreement, nor do I run to the OpenBSD people to ask for their opinion. I would need to hear really good reasons before I change this position. I don't care if one flavor of you must release source code is better than another flavor. If I had the choice it then would be the same BSD licence that I slapped on my older tools. Wietse
Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
Le 28/02/2011 23:03, Quanah Gibson-Mount a écrit : --On Monday, February 28, 2011 3:37 PM -0500 Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote: Wieste, will postfix be moving to the CPL, or will it be retaining the IPL? The IPL is the second license under which Postfix was released. With IPL and CPL being similar in spirit (and equally objectionable for OpenBSD, according to people I talked to) I need to hear good arguments before I would enter further discussion with IBM lawyers. Hi Wieste, I see that the CPL has in fact been replaced with the EPL. Do the BSD folks find it as objectionable as well? humour If you're confusing BSD folks and OpenBSD, then you shouldn't worry about gpl, epl, cpl, ipl and all that jam:) /humour If not, then if you do look into re-licensing postfix, perhaps the EPL would be a better solution. The general argument in favor of re-licensing postfix that I see is that the EPL in particular is seen as more friendly, OSS wise, by other groups, even if not by the BSD folks. postfix is the default MTA in NetBSD. so it seems some of the BSD folks have no problems with the current licence;-p Certainly allowing postfix to be linked against the MySQL libraries without engendering a license violation is a significant positive. Postfix is highly used among various linux distributions (Debian, Ubuntu, SuSE, RedHat all come to mind), but with the exception of Redhat, none of them link postfix against the MySQL libraries by default. could you get any info on how RH are solving the problem (if there is a problem)? I can't believe they could get this wrong. I appreciate you taking the time to ponder what I am sure is quite a arduous task, even if you decide against going forward with it. Regards, Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Sr. Member of Technical Staff Zimbra, Inc A Division of VMware, Inc. Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
--On Monday, February 28, 2011 11:53 PM +0100 mouss mo...@ml.netoyen.net wrote: Certainly allowing postfix to be linked against the MySQL libraries without engendering a license violation is a significant positive. Postfix is highly used among various linux distributions (Debian, Ubuntu, SuSE, RedHat all come to mind), but with the exception of Redhat, none of them link postfix against the MySQL libraries by default. could you get any info on how RH are solving the problem (if there is a problem)? I can't believe they could get this wrong. I'm rather curious about that myself. I have a contact at RH I intend to ask that very question of. ;) --Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Sr. Member of Technical Staff Zimbra, Inc A Division of VMware, Inc. Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
--On Monday, February 28, 2011 5:43 PM -0500 Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote: Quanah Gibson-Mount: Wieste, will postfix be moving to the CPL, or will it be retaining the IPL? The IPL is the second license under which Postfix was released. With IPL and CPL being similar in spirit (and equally objectionable for OpenBSD, according to people I talked to) I need to hear good arguments before I would enter further discussion with IBM lawyers. Hi Wieste, Please, spell my name correctly. Thank you. Sorry, I apologize. Particularly as someone who sees my own name often misspelled. ;) I see that the CPL has in fact been replaced with the EPL. Do the BSD folks find it as objectionable as well? If not, then if you do look into re-licensing postfix, perhaps the EPL would be a better solution. I don't run to the IP laywers for each iteration of the IBM license agreement, nor do I run to the OpenBSD people to ask for their opinion. I would need to hear really good reasons before I change this position. I don't care if one flavor of you must release source code is better than another flavor. If I had the choice it then would be the same BSD licence that I slapped on my older tools. The main issue I see at the moment really is the inability to legally link Postfix to MySQL, removing a valuable piece of Postfix functionality. I also think that the flavor option has some importance. If it allows Postfix to be more widely used in a way that is comfortable to IBM, then I think that is a good thing. --Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Sr. Member of Technical Staff Zimbra, Inc A Division of VMware, Inc. Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
RE: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
Don't be surprised if the ask this list, They have never helped me with my postfix issues. Saludos. Ing. Alfonso Alejandro Reyes Jiménez Analista del sector Gobierno E-mail: aare...@scitum.com.mx Telefono: 91 50 74 00 ext. 7489 Movil: (044) 55 52 98 34 82 -Mensaje original- De: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] En nombre de Quanah Gibson-Mount Enviado el: lunes, 28 de febrero de 2011 04:57 p.m. Para: mouss+nob...@netoyen.net; postfix-users@postfix.org Asunto: Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility --On Monday, February 28, 2011 11:53 PM +0100 mouss mo...@ml.netoyen.net wrote: Certainly allowing postfix to be linked against the MySQL libraries without engendering a license violation is a significant positive. Postfix is highly used among various linux distributions (Debian, Ubuntu, SuSE, RedHat all come to mind), but with the exception of Redhat, none of them link postfix against the MySQL libraries by default. could you get any info on how RH are solving the problem (if there is a problem)? I can't believe they could get this wrong. I'm rather curious about that myself. I have a contact at RH I intend to ask that very question of. ;) --Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Sr. Member of Technical Staff Zimbra, Inc A Division of VMware, Inc. Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
On 03/01/2011 04:23 AM, mouss wrote: postfix is the default MTA in NetBSD. so it seems some of the BSD folks have no problems with the current licence;-p Speaking of default MTAs, Postfix is the default MTA on Ubuntu Server as well. Mihira.
Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
Quanah Gibson-Mount put forth on 2/28/2011 4:03 PM: Postfix is highly used among various linux distributions (Debian, Ubuntu, SuSE, RedHat all come to mind), but with the exception of Redhat, none of them link postfix against the MySQL libraries by default. I'm no dev so please excuse the stupid questions. You mention by default. What exactly is the issue here? With Debian, if I need mysql support I simply install the extra package postfix-mysql, which depends on libmysqlclient. (This is the same procedure for acquiring pgsql, pcre, cdb, ldap, etc capability) So by installing the package postfix-mysql and libmysqlclient, am I violating a license agreement? If not, what's the difference, and why? Thanks. -- Stan
Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 09:22:52PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote: With Debian, if I need mysql support I simply install the extra package postfix-mysql, which depends on libmysqlclient. (This is the same procedure for acquiring pgsql, pcre, cdb, ldap, etc capability) So by installing the package postfix-mysql and libmysqlclient, am I violating a license agreement? If not, what's the difference, and why? This is a legal question. The postfix-mysql loadable object links Postfix table driver code available under the IPL against the MySQL shared library. Whether this is allowed under the MySQL license is not completely clear. It is not a problem with Postgres or LDAP. -- Viktor.
mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
Just curious, the GPL and the IPL are not license compatible. Anyone know how RHEL and other sites deal with this when trying to provide a postfix with mysql tables as an option? I see that postfix on RHEL6 clearly links against mysql: cd /usr/sbin [build@zre-rhel6-64 sbin]$ ldd postfix libmysqlclient.so.16 = /usr/lib64/mysql/libmysqlclient.so.16 (0x7f6e79d26000) --Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Sr. Member of Technical Staff Zimbra, Inc A Division of VMware, Inc. Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 04:39:25PM -0800, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote: Just curious, the GPL and the IPL are not license compatible. Anyone know how RHEL and other sites deal with this when trying to provide a postfix with mysql tables as an option? [IANAL] The MySQL client libraries may also be linked with software available under various other open-source licenses: http://www.mysql.com/about/legal/licensing/foss-exception/ Among these is the Common Public License, which IBM now uses instead of IPL, but it is not obvious to me that the CPL applies to Postfix. http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/os-cplfaq.html 1. What is the relationship between the IBM(R) Public License (IPL) and the Common Public License (CPL)? The IPL was IBM's first open source license. The CPL is essentially the next version of the IPL. the Postfix license states: IBM may publish new versions (including revisions) of this Agreement from time to time. Each new version of the Agreement will be given a distinguishing version number. The Program (including Contributions) may always be distributed subject to the version of the Agreement under which it was received. In addition, after a new version of the Agreement is published, Contributor may elect to distribute the Program (including its Contributions) under the new version. so it is perhaps useful to understand whether the CPL is such a new version, and whether Postfix may now be distributed under the CPL. I see that postfix on RHEL6 clearly links against mysql: While the IPL is listed at: http://www.opensource.org/licenses/alphabetical The MySQL FOSS exception, however, does not broadly include all OSI licenses. -- Viktor.
Re: mysql GPL/postfix IPL incompatibility
--On Saturday, February 26, 2011 1:41 AM -0500 Victor Duchovni victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com wrote: On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 04:39:25PM -0800, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote: Just curious, the GPL and the IPL are not license compatible. Anyone know how RHEL and other sites deal with this when trying to provide a postfix with mysql tables as an option? [IANAL] The MySQL client libraries may also be linked with software available under various other open-source licenses: http://www.mysql.com/about/legal/licensing/foss-exception/ Among these is the Common Public License, which IBM now uses instead of IPL, but it is not obvious to me that the CPL applies to Postfix. http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/os-cplfaq.html 1. What is the relationship between the IBM(R) Public License (IPL) and the Common Public License (CPL)? The IPL was IBM's first open source license. The CPL is essentially the next version of the IPL. the Postfix license states: IBM may publish new versions (including revisions) of this Agreement from time to time. Each new version of the Agreement will be given a distinguishing version number. The Program (including Contributions) may always be distributed subject to the version of the Agreement under which it was received. In addition, after a new version of the Agreement is published, Contributor may elect to distribute the Program (including its Contributions) under the new version. so it is perhaps useful to understand whether the CPL is such a new version, and whether Postfix may now be distributed under the CPL. I see that postfix on RHEL6 clearly links against mysql: While the IPL is listed at: http://www.opensource.org/licenses/alphabetical The MySQL FOSS exception, however, does not broadly include all OSI licenses. Victor, Thanks for the information, very useful. I would be particularly curious to know if Postfix is now licensed under the CPL rather than the IPL. Would Wietse need to confirm that? Thanks, Quanah -- Quanah Gibson-Mount Sr. Member of Technical Staff Zimbra, Inc A Division of VMware, Inc. Zimbra :: the leader in open source messaging and collaboration
