Hello,
I have a question regarding the licensing of developed 389-ds plugins.
The FAQ (https://directory.fedoraproject.org/docs/389ds/FAQ/licensing.html#directory-...) indicates that the Directory Server core code is licensed under a GPL + Exception license that allows non-GPL 389-ds plugins to link to 389-ds and to use specific header files.
However, the LICENSE file in the current 389-ds-base source does not contain this exception. It was apparently removed by the following commit, when the license was changed to GPLv3+:
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/c/88cae401aee39a19ac6b07c3c36ee8daa07192e7
Does that means that the license exception does not apply to the current version of 389-ds?
Regards,
Vincent Duvert
Hi there,
It is indeed a problem, and a potentially annoying one at that. It's good you are bringing this up so we can resolve it.
I think it would be best to contact Red Hat / SUSE legal to get this looked at so we know what's the correct way to resolve it.
Thanks,
On 4 Sep 2020, at 18:05, DUVERT Vincent Vincent.DUVERT@viveris.fr wrote:
Hello,
I have a question regarding the licensing of developed 389-ds plugins.
The FAQ (https://directory.fedoraproject.org/docs/389ds/FAQ/licensing.html#directory-...) indicates that the Directory Server core code is licensed under a GPL + Exception license that allows non-GPL 389-ds plugins to link to 389-ds and to use specific header files.
However, the LICENSE file in the current 389-ds-base source does not contain this exception. It was apparently removed by the following commit, when the license was changed to GPLv3+:
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/c/88cae401aee39a19ac6b07c3c36ee8daa07192e7
Does that means that the license exception does not apply to the current version of 389-ds?
Regards,
Vincent Duvert _______________________________________________ 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@lists.fedoraproject....
— Sincerely,
William Brown
Senior Software Engineer, 389 Directory Server SUSE Labs
Hello,
Has there been any updates on this issue? From what I can tell, there is still a discrepancy between the 389-ds FAQ (which mentions the plugin license exception) and the actual 389-ds license. I'd like to know if reinstating the license exception is still on the cards, or if we should prepare our plugins to be released under GPLv3.
Regards, Vincent Duvert
-----Message d'origine----- Hello,
I have a question regarding the licensing of developed 389-ds plugins.
The FAQ (https://directory.fedoraproject.org/docs/389ds/FAQ/licensing.html#directory-...) indicates that the Directory Server core code is licensed under a GPL + Exception license that allows non-GPL 389-ds plugins to link to 389-ds and to use specific header files.
However, the LICENSE file in the current 389-ds-base source does not contain this exception. It was apparently removed by the following commit, when the license was changed to GPLv3+:
https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/c/88cae401aee39a19ac6b07c3c36ee8daa07192e7
Does that means that the license exception does not apply to the current version of 389-ds?
Regards,
Vincent Duvert
389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org