httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ryan Bloom" <...@covalent.net>
Subject RE: Looking for some help developing a MPM
Date Mon, 05 Aug 2002 16:34:10 GMT
Okay, but I have a question.  From the GPL FAQ:

Q:  You have a GPL'ed program that I'd like to link with my code to
build a proprietary program. Does the fact that I link with your program
mean I have to GPL my program?

A:  Yes.

If I re-word the question:

Q:  You have a GPL'ed library that I'd like to link with my code to
build an MPM for Apache.  Does the fact that I link with your program
mean I have to GPL my MPM?

A:  I don't know, but the two questions look too close to identical for
me.

IMHO, this does call the GDBM code into questions too.

Ryan

----------------------------------------------
Ryan Bloom
rbb@covalent.net           rbb@apache.org

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rodent of Unusual Size [mailto:Ken.Coar@Golux.Com]
> Sent: Monday, August 05, 2002 9:36 AM
> To: dev@httpd.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Looking for some help developing a MPM
> 
> Ryan Bloom wrote:
> >
> > BTW, I realize that there is a lot of questions over whether the ASF
> > license and the GPL are compatible, but the State-Threads library is
> > GPL'ed, not LGPL'ed.  There are some members of the ASF board who
say
> > that they are compatible, there are some members who say they
aren't.
> > The FSF says the aren't.  I believe that we are in murky waters with
an
> > MPM that MUST link to a GPL'ed library.  Doesn't that mean that the
MPM
> > must also be GPL'ed.  Isn't that why the GPL is a viral license????
> 
> Okey, here's my take on this:
> 
> The GPL has some interestingly applicable clauses:
> "Activities other than copying, distribution and modification
> are not covered by this License; they are outside its scope."
> 
> and
> 
> "In addition, mere aggregation of another work not based on
> the Program with the Program (or with a work based on the
> Program) on a volume of a storage or distribution medium does
> not bring the other work under the scope of this License."
> 
> So I think it's quite clear that we are in no danger if we
> put the MPM into our repository, as long as it doesn't include
> any of the actual GPLed code.
> 
> Here's the clause that makes the GPL viral, Ryan:
> 
> "b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish,
> that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program
> or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to
> all third parties under the terms of this License."
> 
> We're not doing anything even remotely resembling the above,
> so we're safe.
> --
> #ken	P-)}
> 
> Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini  http://Golux.Com/coar/
> Author, developer, opinionist      http://Apache-Server.Com/
> 
> "Millennium hand and shrimp!"


Mime
View raw message