[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Subversion 1.1.0 Release Candidate 1 released.

From: Robert Koberg <rob_at_koberg.com>
Date: 2004-07-15 02:11:09 CEST

Mark Phippard wrote:

>
>
>I could be wrong, but I read this as saying does he have to pay Sleepycat a
>license if he is using Subversion to manage a closed source product. I
>think the answer to that would be no.
>
>

Our case is probably too unique and I may have over-genralized. We are
an application service provider content management system. I would use
subversion to manage paying clients file based config, content and
templates. I would also use it to version our CMS app.

What concerned me was that when I inquired at Sleepycat about XMLDB for
a not-for-profit portal we manage for the client, that we were required
to pay the licensing fees. This was because we developed it locally on
our internal network, but the end product would be hosted on different
servers that exists at a different postal address. From what I
understood, if we developped at the same address where we deployed, then
we would not have to pay the licensing.

But really I was still confused. I presented different scenarios that I
thought met the license requirements, but the gist I got was that the
only way to use XMLDB was to have an open source app (or have all the
contributors develop in vi on the remote server...). I don't mind paying
(though Tamino was much more feature rich and was much more willing to
reduce price for our non-profit client...).

I had been hoping (obviously not following very closely) that the file
system version of Subversion would not use BDB. Is it necessary? In
other words are there plans to *not* use BDB? This is not a major issue
for us as CVS is working fine for our needs -- just interested in using
the better technology.

I get the impression, from what I read, that to download and use BDB for
subversion on our remote servers would not require licensing fees, but I
was wrong about XMLDB and it took a good deal of time to clear it up.

best,
-Rob

>The only case where you might have to pay a license fee to Sleepycat would
>be if you were going to take Subversion and use it to build a new closed
>souce product based on Subversion.
>
>Mark
>
>
>
>
>On Wed, 2004-07-14 at 16:51, Robert Koberg wrote:
>
>
>
>>If you have a closed source project and need to download a newer version
>>of BDB to your server, do you need to pay Berkeley Systems licensing
>>
>>
>fees?
>
>Yes, that's my understanding. If you create a closed-source product and
>sell it, and it depends on BDB, then you must pay licensing fees to
>Sleepycat. For example, Collabnet's own product must do this. If your
>project is open-source, then there are no fees.
>
>
>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
>
>
>
>
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Jul 15 02:12:34 2004

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Users mailing list.