httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bill Stoddard" <>
Subject ASF License vs GPL ... was... Re: [PATCH] ap_add_filter
Date Tue, 22 Aug 2000 04:08:23 GMT
> ALL of Apache is already open-source and public anyway so why
> should there ever be a concern about dumping GNU code
> into Apache itself? You have nothing to lose. Or am I still
> totally missing something about ASF license versus GNU?

Not really interested in starting a new thread on this topic, but....... yes, there is plenty
missing if you believe the ASF license is compatable with the GPL. The big difference is that
ASF license allows you to derive a product based on Apache and not release the source code
to that
derived product. The GPL holds a figurative gun to your head to force you to comply with its
If you think there is even the slightest chance that you will EVER need to release a closed
derivitive of a GPL'ed piece of code (for -any- reason, some of which may not be under your
control), you better not use that code. Consider this... If Apache were GPL'ed, then one year
ago it
would have been impossible for any U.S. based firm to legally sell/give-away a secure (SSL)
GPL says you have to open source, but U.S. govt says you cannot open source encryption code.
you can split hairs on interpreting the exact meaning of the GPL license terms, but in the
wrangling over license issues it is just a waste of time that doesn't contribute anything
business objectives or the state-of-the-art. Why box yourself in using the GPL?

The ASF license is based on mutual trust between the development community and the companies
some of
us work for;  trust that if you use Apache as a base for a closed source derivitive you will
than make up for it in contributions back to the open source project. I think Apache proves
less restrictive licenses can work and work very well, better than more restrictive licenses
the GPL.

Bill Stoddard

View raw message