GnuTLS Update [LSARC/2008/341 FastTrack timeout 06/03/2008]

[Jörg Barfurth]

James Carlson schrieb:

>>         Note:
>>          The "extra" GnuTLS libraries -- which contains OpenPGP and TLS/IA 
>>          support, LZO compression, the OpenSSL compatibility library -- 
>>          and the self tests and command line tools are distributed under 
>>          the GNU General Public License version 3.0 (or later), therefore,
>>          we remove them.  
> 
> Yikes.  Subordinating system architecture and open source
> compatibility to legal review seems like a long-term mistake.
> 

I think use of the GPL for libraries is a special case here, as would be 
use of any similarly 'viral' license, which places requirements on 
licensing of derived products [*]. If OpenSolaris exports an interface 
under such a license, it can be used by ISVs[**] only if they are 
willing to license their own software as prescribed. This means that 
such an interface would not be suitable as the only public interface to 
a piece of OpenSolaris functionality or as the replacement for an 
existing, generally usable interface.

More generally it remains to be discussed if such interfaces should be 
offered as part of 'core' OpenSolaris interfaces - unless the community 
agrees upon a goal to incent third party software developers to adopt a 
particular license for their OpenSolaris based software by providing 
interfaces with such restrictions.

This consideration makes 'viral' licensing an architectural concern.

[*] Disclaimer: IANAL, but afaict that is a core feature of GPL in 
certain uses. Ask your lawyer, if you need actual legal advice on 
software licenses.

[**] Or OpenSolaris developers for that matter...

> Is anyone looking at this problem?  Or will Open Solaris (despite the
> best efforts of the Indiana team and the ARC "gang of four") just
> drift away from Linux as more things become GPLv3?
> 

Maybe we need a separate 'GPL licensed libraries and plugins' package 
repository outside the 'core OpenSolaris' one, just as much as we appear 
to need 'closed source bits and pieces' or 'other less well integrated 
software' repositories. In all cases the core architecture should be 
defined (IMHO) without reliance on any of these extra pieces of 
software. How much architectural effort should be spends on these extras 
appears to be an open issue.

AFAICT use of GPLv3 in general is a different issue. IIRC Sun has 
already released sofware under that license, so it shouldn't be a 
problem per se.

- Jörg

-- 
Joerg Barfurth
Software Engineer        mailto:joerg.barfurth at sun.com
Desktop Technology
Thin Client Software     http://www.sun.com/software/sunray/
Sun Microsystems GmbH    http://www.sun.com/software/javadesktopsystem/