directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <...@jaguNET.com>
Subject Re: [bdbje] [Licensing] Open Source verses Commercial Use
Date Fri, 29 Jul 2005 17:14:38 GMT

On Jul 25, 2005, at 7:56 PM, Michael A. Olson wrote:


> All,
>
>
> Let me begin by pointing out what may be obvious -- there's no  
> issue of compatibility between the Apache License 2.0 and the  
> Sleepycat Public License. The Sleepycat license was designed to be  
> identical in effect with the GPL.
>

That is the rub. For example, let's assume that the Apache Web Server
had a VERY strong dependency on gdbm (for APR's dbm). This
would cause problems for commercial entities to use Apache
as they do nowadays, and would be a major impact to the
type of commercial usage so basic to the Apache License.

Yes, having Sleepycat also offer a commercial license does
somewhat alleviate the problem, but it does not make it
go away, since it then makes it appear that core functionality
requires a non-free, "proprietary" solution, which is also
at odds with the AL.

Mime
View raw message