"Per Winkvist" <per.winkvist@uk.com> wrote on 08/12/2004 01:52:41 AM:
> citerar Mark Phippard <MarkP@softlanding.com>:
>
> > "Per Winkvist" <per.winkvist@uk.com> wrote on 08/11/2004 04:28:04 PM:
> >
> > >
> > > "The Sleepycat open source license permits you to use Berkeley DB,
> > > Berkeley DB XML or Berkeley DB Java Edition at no charge under the
> > > condition that if you use the software in an application you
> > > redistribute, the complete source code for your application must be
> > > available and freely redistributable under reasonable conditions. "
> > >
> > > If I understood this right, I can't use it w/o releasing the source.
> > >
> >
> > I wouldn't want to go to court over it, but the fact that you are only
> > accessing their libraries indirectly should shield you somewhat.
> Also,
> > you could make your code freely available to anyone that signs the
> NDA,
> > and one could argue that is a reasonable condition since you had to
> agree
> > to it yourself.
>
> If this was the case, you could write a wrapper around a library, then
> call the wrapper functions instead. The same occurs if you wanna
> develop close source KDE software, then you need a Qt license. Doesn't
> matter that you access Qt indirectly :=)
>
I do not think that would be a direct comparison because in your example
you are intentionally doing something to circumvent the license. In this
case, you would legitimately using the libraries of an open source
application that does comply with the license terms. You are not using
BDB, you are using Subversion. The end user might choose to be using
Subversion with BDB, but you are not doing so directly yourself.
Maybe you should email Sleepycat for clarification? Their license seems
to be much more about the "intent". You are essentially producing an open
source project that meets their basic criteria. It is just that you
potentially have some external restrictions, the Microsoft NDA, that you
also have to adhere to. However, the source could still be made freely
available to anyone that signed the same NDA. As I said, one could easily
argue that those are "reasonable" terms.
Also, hopefully MS has lifted the NDA and this no longer even applies.
Mark
_____________________________________________________________________________
Scanned for SoftLanding Systems, Inc. by IBM Email Security Management Services powered by MessageLabs.
_____________________________________________________________________________
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Aug 12 15:17:06 2004