Google Groups Home
Help | Sign in
Lift
Home
+ new post
Pages
Files
About this group
Join this group
Message from discussion Db4o
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
David Pollak  
View profile  
 More options Dec 9 2007, 10:09 pm
From: David Pollak <d...@athena.com>
Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2007 19:09:53 -0800
Local: Sun, Dec 9 2007 10:09 pm
Subject: Re: [lift] Re: Db4o
Reply to author | Forward | Print | View thread | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

Chris,

Chatting with their CEO right now.

The issue is not just the lift issue... it's the apps built with lift  
issue.

As DavidB pointed out, it's cool to do a plugin for lift as long as  
it's not distributed with the core lift release.

The problem comes when the code lift release contains GPL code or  
links to GPL code... it means that all code that's built with lift  
must conform to the GPL's requirements.

Imagine if someone wants to build a non-open source app (e.g., Much4)  
on top of lift.  Even if the app is not using db4o, there's a license  
conflict because lift "links to" db4o and that imparts the  
requirements of the GPL on the code that links to lift because it can  
very easily and reasonably be argued that the linking is transitory.

So... without poking the GPL bear thing again... that's the issue.

I want to find a way around the issue so we can have db4o support and  
allow people who actually use db4o in their apps either license it or  
open source their apps.

Thanks,

David

On Dec 9, 2007, at 7:02 PM, Chris Baker wrote:

> On Dec 9, 2007 4:08 PM, David Pollak <d...@athena.com> wrote:
> It's an interesting concept, but it can't be done as part of lift as
> (oh no, here I go again), DB4O is GPL and the GPL and Apache 2.0
> licenses don't mix.

> This might be of interest:

> db4o News and Press Releases

> db4objects Introduces New Licensing Option to Extend Open Source  
> Compatibility
> New dOCL license fosters rapid adoption of db4o in wider range of  
> open source projects

> SAN MATEO, Calif., Jan. 24, 2007 - db4objects (www.db4o.com),  
> creator of the leading open source object database, today announced  
> the introduction of a third licensing option dubbed dOCL (db4o  
> Opensource Compatibility License). The licensing option supports  
> free/open source projects that want to embed db4o under standard  
> open source licensing terms other than GPL.

> This announcement broadens db4o's adoption for projects licensed  
> under Apache, LGPL, BSD, EPL, and other standard open source  
> licensing terms. Major open source projects that currently include  
> or that plan to include db4o are Novell's Mono, Redhat's Fedora-
> Linux, Eclipse (Apogee), Spring, JPOX, Apache-Lucene (Gdata) and  
> Funambol (SyncML).

> Chris

--
David Pollak
http://blog.lostlake.org

    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2009 Google