Re: OJE project

[Kevin A. Burton]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Mark Wielaard <address@hidden> writes:

> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 07:16:30AM -0700, Kevin A. Burton wrote:
> > Mark Wielaard <address@hidden> writes:
> > 
> > > The APL is compatible with our license (as used by Classpath, the GPL plus
> > > a special linking exception). But it isn't compatible with pure GPL.
> > 
> > Could you explain how?  The advertising clause still remains.  Is this your
> > opinion or Stallmans?
>
> My opinion and how Richard Stallman thinks about how APL+ GPL are not
> compatible can be found in the archives of the debian-legal mailinglist:
> <http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal-0006/threads.html>
> 
> The reason that the Classpath code is compatible with almost everything
> (even proprietary stuff) is because the special exception clause:
> 
>   As a special exception, if you link this library with other files to
>   produce an executable, this library does not by itself cause the
>   resulting executable to be covered by the GNU General Public License.
>   This exception does not however invalidate any other reasons why the
>   executable file might be covered by the GNU General Public License.

The problem I think is not this way -> but this way <-   :)

I might argue that the above is correct but the tough part is that there is a
LOT of good code I would like to bring over from jakarta because we have had to
implement some of the Java stuff in other libraries to bring JDK 1.2 features to
JDK 1.1.8 JVMs.  It is bad that I can't just migrate that code over because
althoght it is APL it certainly is not copyleft :(

> > > It is said that RMS and Brian Behlendorf are working on these issues.
> > 
> > No...  it isn't.  I talked to RMS about this < 1 month ago and the
> > situation is  resolved.  As long as the licensing clause is in the APL
> > they are not compatible
> > ... :(.
>
> To bad. I heard that Brian Behlendorf and Richard Stallman were trying
> to come to an agreement on how to change the APL so it would become GPL
> compatible. Brian Behlendorf has said that he really would have no problem
> with people using Apache code in GPLed projects. So I hoped they had
> talked about how to make this possible by changing the license.

I was at ApacheCon today and had a number of talks about this issue.  I don't
think anyone from the GPL camp wants to fight with the ASF and vice-versa.
Maybe we should have a catch-all in the GPL that says "The GPL is compatible
with any OSS license wich is Open Source".  I think this is a good compromise
between a copyleft viral license and fighting with our brothers in the OSS
camp.

... can't we all just get along :)

Kevin

- -- 
Kevin A. Burton ( address@hidden, address@hidden, address@hidden )
        Cell: 408-910-6145 URL: http://relativity.yi.org ICQ: 73488596 

Live life as if you were going to die tomorrow; Learn as if you were going to
live forever.  -- Mahatma Ghandi
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Get my public key at: http://relativity.yi.org/pgpkey.txt

iD8DBQE6zQvAAwM6xb2dfE0RAimHAJ9RcXDOPVjVWJ4rPcFLVSJP6XPm0wCgw/FZ
VQQfpQbj6gM/edGH4h+FgDc=
=r6AF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----