TDB license (was: Re: tdb performance)
mikal at stillhq.com
Wed Jan 23 13:57:04 GMT 2002
On Wed, 23 Jan 2002, Jeremy Allison wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2002 at 04:05:07PM -0500, David Chappell wrote:
> > TDB looks very nice and is small while Sleepycat's and SQ Lite look like
> > overkill, but there is one problem that has so far made me hesitate to
> > use it. My project (the PPR print spooler) is distributed under the BSD
> > license. If I were to include TDB then, as I understand it, my whole
> > project would automatically come under the GPL. Now I have nothing
> > against the GPL, but I have reasons for wanting to keep this particular
> > project BSD.
> > So I think it is a good thing that Samba as a whole is under the GPL,
> > but I also think it would be nice if TDB were licensed under the LGPL.
> > That way, people from other projects who used TDB would still have to
> > contribute their fixes and improvements but they could still make their
> > own decisions about how to license their projects.
> > I understand that Richard Stallman disagrees with this reasoning,
> > basically because he sees GPL licensed libraries as an incentive to
> > choose the GPL for new projects.
> So do we. This is why tdb is GPL. We're not going to re-license tdb
> under the LGPL.
My project is licensed under the GPL, so I can appreciate the requirement
to have tdb GPL'ed, and have no problem with that.
It was, however, my understanding that if I had say a BSD licensed
project, then it was still cool to link to a GPL'ed library... So long as
I was to distribute the tdb stuff separately, and not modify it without
releasing those changes. Then again, I am willing to be wrong.
My original question was more of a politeness thing -- I don't want to be
installing libraries named tdb on people machines if that is going to
cause upset for the Samba team.
Michael Still (mikal at stillhq.com)
More information about the samba-technical