Re: TODO: GNU TLS - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: TODO: GNU TLS
Date
Msg-id 200612301921.kBUJLMc00708@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: TODO: GNU TLS  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
Responses Re: TODO: GNU TLS
List pgsql-hackers
Stephen Frost wrote:
-- Start of PGP signed section.
> * Bruce Momjian (bruce@momjian.us) wrote:
> > Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > Yet *having* that requirement on a *derived work* which includes GPL
> > > code is *against* the terms of the GPL.  That's *exactly* the issue.
> > > The GPL says more than "you must provide the source code to everything",
> > > it explicitly includes a requirement that no additional restrictions be
> > > put on the derivative (lest requirements for no-additional-distribution
> > > or must-charge-for-other-distribution be added which defeats much of the
> > > point of the GPL).
> > 
> > Our BSD license has this restriction: 
> > 
> > > provided that the above copyright notice and this
> > > paragraph and the following two paragraphs appear in all copies.
> > 
> > Why is this not an _additional_ restriction, and hence GPL and BSD
> > software cannot be bundled into a binary?  What does "appear in all
> > copies" mean, especially if you don't need to ship the source code under
> > the BSD license?
> 
> As I pointed out previously, it's part of the copyright notice, and the
> GPL has the exact same requirement:
> 
>   1. You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's
>   source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you
>   conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate
>   copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty; keep intact all the
>   notices that refer to this License and to the absence of any warranty;
>   and give any other recipients of the Program a copy of this License
>   along with the Program.
> 
> So it's *not* an additional restriction.  Not to mention the other
> reason- the license isn't part of the *work*.

It is an _additional_ license you have to include, not just their
license.  I don't see how requiring an advertizing clause is an
additional restriction, but requiring an additional license isn't.

I don't understand the "work" issue as it applies here.

--  Bruce Momjian   bruce@momjian.us EnterpriseDB    http://www.enterprisedb.com
 + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: TODO: GNU TLS
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: TODO: GNU TLS