FreeTDS Development Group

[Steve Langasek <vorlon AT netexpress.net>]

On Fri, Sep 27, 2002 at 11:31:37AM -0400, Lowden, James K wrote:
> > From: Steve Langasek [mailto:vorlon AT netexpress.net]
> > Sent: September 27, 2002 11:07 AM

> > The other option is to use editline instead of readline.

> That seems the best idea; I'm sure Christos would approve.  

The problem I have with this approach is that it still leaves us
incompatible with other GPL code.  The LGPL (which gnutls uses) is
compatible with everything; the BSD-with-advertising license that openssl
uses is compatible with everything except the GPL.  In the long run,
gnutls would cause far fewer licensing problems if we can make it do what
we need.

So I'll see if gnutls supports the md4 routines we need, or if I can
cajole someone into writing them for us.

> While we're on the subject, freebcp is LPGL, too, copyright BB.  Was that
> intentional, or should that also be GPL, and subject to the same problems?  

The specific problem is that you cannot link GPL code against libssl and
*distribute the two together* without the approval of the copyright
holder of the GPL code.  It's not a problem for anyone distributing
source, or distributing just freetds binaries from their website; but
it's an issue for distributions such as Debian, and if it can't be
resolved, it will surely cause FreeTDS to be marginalized.

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: pgpefKFrq2Y11.pgp
Description: PGP signature