On 01/08/2015 02:56 PM, Jan Staněk wrote:
Hi guys,
as the new BerkeleyDB 6.x has a more restrictive license than the
previous versions (AGPLv3 vs. LGPLv2), and due to that many projects
cannot use it, perhaps it is time to get rid of it from Fedora for good
- or at least trim down the list of packages dependent on it as much as
possible.
The previous license was the Sleepycat license, not the LGPLv2. The
Sleepycat license requires distribution of source code of the
application as well, not just the library, so it is closer in effect to
the GPL than to the LGPL.
The AGPLv3 inherits the sell-yourself-into-slavery clause from the GPLv3
(*), so there are some cases where the new AGPLv3 license is less
restrictive than the older Sleepycat license (depending on how the
copyright owner interprets the older license—in the GPL case, it was
argued that the sell-yourself-into-slavery permission was implicit in
version 2).
(*) “You may convey covered works to others for the sole purpose of
having them make modifications exclusively for you, or provide you with
facilities for running those works, provided that you comply with the
terms of this License in conveying all material for which you do not
control copyright. Those thus making or running the covered works for
you must do so exclusively on your behalf, under your direction and
control, on terms that prohibit them from making any copies of your
copyrighted material outside their relationship with you.”
The topic of BerkeleyDB v6 in Fedora was already discussed at this
list
[1], and it turned out that peaceful cooperation of multiple libdb
versions in system is very problematic. As some packages cannot use
newer versions, we are basically stuck with v5 - unless we get rid of it
altogether or find another solution.
One of the recent press releases from Oracle specifically advertised
Fedora support, so maybe they are interested in a closer collaboration,
addressing Fedora's objections to the new license?
--
Florian Weimer / Red Hat Product Security