![]() | |
#1
| |||
| |||
|
#2
| |||
| |||
|
|
How exactly does the Open Source License work for BerkeleyDB? Does it imply that any application that uses (links with) it has to be under GPL license? Or can it be under some other Open Source License like BSD License for instance? |
|
How to properly read the term "use" in this context? Is the direct invocation of BDB API a "use"? I assume it is. But what about more complex cases? Is the use determined by the fact of linking (statically or dynamically) with libraries built from BDB source code? |
|
Do I have to pay for a Berkeley DB license5A to use it in my Perl or Python scripts? No, you may use the Berkeley DB open source license at no cost. The Berkeley DB open source license requires that software that uses Berkeley DB be freely redistributable. In the case of Perl or Python, that software is Perl or Python, and not your scripts. Any scripts you write are your property, including scripts that make use of Berkeley DB. None of the Perl, Python or Berkeley DB licenses place any restrictions on what you may do with them. |
#3
| |||
| |||
|
|
How exactly does the Open Source License work for BerkeleyDB? Does it imply that any application that uses (links with) it has to be under GPL license? Or can it be under some other Open Source License like BSD License for instance?It doesn't have to be GPL, but at least the resulting executable has to be treated as if it were covered by the GPL (that is, you must distribute source code along with them). How to properly read the term "use" in this context? Is the direct invocation of BDB API a "use"? I assume it is. But what about more complex cases? Is the use determined by the fact of linking (statically or dynamically) with libraries built from BDB source code?I can't help you with these questions. Sleepycat's position was somewhat inconsistent in the past. I'm pretty sure they assume that dynamically linking against the library causes the resulting work to be covered by the source code distribution requirement. But on the other hand, Perl and Python scripts can use the library, independently of the licensing terms: | Do I have to pay for a Berkeley DB license5A to use it in my Perl or Python scripts? | | No, you may use the Berkeley DB open source license at no cost. The | Berkeley DB open source license requires that software that uses | Berkeley DB be freely redistributable. In the case of Perl or Python, | that software is Perl or Python, and not your scripts. Any scripts you | write are your property, including scripts that make use of Berkeley | DB. None of the Perl, Python or Berkeley DB licenses place any | restrictions on what you may do with them. http://www.oracle.com/technology/sof...eley-db/htdocs... An interesting question is how Java fits into that interpretation. |
#4
| |||
| |||
|
|
But what about a remote application that connects to this custom DB server and manipulates data? Does it have to be made Open Source as well? My understanding is that if Oracle uses a standard GPL then by the "viral" nature of it I would have to make my DB server GPL'ed as well as the application itself has to be GPL'ed; |
#5
| |||
| |||
|
|
But what about a remote application that connects to this custom DB server and manipulates data? Does it have to be made Open Source as well? My understanding is that if Oracle uses a standard GPL then by the "viral" nature of it I would have to make my DB server GPL'ed as well as the application itself has to be GPL'ed;I do not consider network access to the functionality of a server distribution of the server's object code. In other words, no distribution in the GPL sense takes place, and its viral nature doesn't come into effect. (I can't tell you if Oracle shares this view.) |
#6
| |||
| |||
|
|
I agree. Besides, GPL is not even mentioned in the License Agreement http://www.oracle.com/technology/sof...ley-db/htdocs/ oslicense.html>. |
#7
| |||
| |||
|
#8
| |||
| |||
|
#9
| |||
| |||
|
#10
| |||
| |||
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |