river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Brouwer <mark.brou...@cheiron.org>
Subject Re: a potential "AR1" release
Date Sun, 02 Sep 2007 13:10:03 GMT
John McClain - Sun Microsystems, Inc. wrote:

>     Berkeley DB Java Edition : seems to be a good fit with what
>     Outrigger needs, not sure about licensing, it is available
>     under an "OSI-certified" open source license but I don't
>     know which license it is and if there are any license
>     compatibility issues with Apache.

The license is here
and while the license itself qualifies as OSI I don't really think it is
compatible due to its viral term 3. Although inclusion of the Berkeley
DB Java Edition libraries in SVN seems to be no problems as the ASF
itself complies to the terms. Downstream users are however severely
impacted by the (viral) license term 3 and this seems to conflict with
the principals contained in the ALv2 or what is written as the guiding
principles here: http://people.apache.org/~rubys/3party.html.

I'm not speaking a moral judgment about whether or not I like the
Berkeley DB Java Edition license, let us say it is maybe an
understandable license, but I consider it a kind of booby trap in this
case. Assuming we could include Berkeley DB with the River distribution
and the whole is licensed under the ALv2 and an ISV wants to ship its
product using Outrigger as closed source it must remove Berkeley DB from
the distributions, this I think sucks for an ASF distribution. Although
one hopes everybody respects each other licensing terms I've seen a lot
of non-compliance with regard to the MySQL JDBC drivers that have a
similar license.

I see no problem though in e.g. providing the interface to Berkeley DB
in the same way as it was/is done for PSE but I would be against
shipping Berkely DB (assuming it was/is possible), but there are also
other decent performing routes possible based on compatible licenses.

View raw message