apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Guenter Knauf <fua...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Looking for final determination on shipping binary dbd/dbm stubs
Date Thu, 30 Jul 2009 17:53:26 GMT
Nick Kew schrieb:
> On 30 Jul 2009, at 06:13, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>> In between are mysql and db which both have copy-left viral terms
>> but are not GPL per say.  I thought we had worked out that apr_dbd_mysql
>> is ok, but I can't find the notes :(
> re: MySQL
> If it helps, I just checked back in my blog:
> http://bahumbug.wordpress.com/2007/08/08/apacheapr-mysql-driver/
> It's clear the date of that blog article follows  discussion on-list
> that led to the decision to include it, and it sets out the terms on
> which we distribute it as I see it:
> "Suppose we were distributing a non-free product that was arguably a
> MySQL “derivative work” under the terms of the GPL. We could negotiate
> terms with MySQL. For a commercial product, that would probably mean
> paying them money, but that’s beside the point. Under our agreement with
> MySQL, we can distribute our product on our agreed terms, without
> reference to the GPL. No problem.
> But that’s exactly what the FOSS Exception gives us. Explicit permission
> to distribute our product under the ASL. We didn’t pay for it, but we
> got it anyway. End of problem."
but does this also cover distributign binaries which link against
libmysql.[so|dll|nlm] ?
And while on this topic: how about PgSQL?


View raw message