mailutils, and the licencing web

[Sam Roberts]

Ok, I'm not sure where this stands, so some licencing questions.

<arpa/inet.h> on my system:

 * Copyright (c) 1983, 1993
 *    The Regents of the University of California.  All rights reserved.
 * 
 * Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
 * modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
 * are met:
 * 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
 *    notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
 * 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
 *    notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
 *    documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
 * 3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software
 *    must display the following acknowledgement:
 *      This product includes software developed by the University of
 *      California, Berkeley and its contributors.
 * 4. Neither the name of the University nor the names of its contributors
 *    may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software
 *    without specific prior written permission.

This clause 3 Sergey mentions doesn't seem to exist in CMUs licence,
it seems to say the opposite, in fact:

          Copyright 1998 by Carnegie Mellon University

                        All Rights Reserved

  Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software and its
  documentation for any purpose and without fee is hereby granted,
  provided that the above copyright notice appear in all copies and that
  both that copyright notice and this permission notice appear in
  supporting documentation, and that the name of Carnegie Mellon
  University not be used in advertising or publicity pertaining to
          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^

  distribution of the software without specific, written prior
  permission.

  CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH REGARD TO
  THIS SOFTWARE, INCLUDING ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND
  FITNESS, IN NO EVENT SHALL CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY BE LIABLE FOR
  ANY SPECIAL, INDIRECT OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR ANY DAMAGES
  WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN
  ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT
  OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE.


It's in one directory, right now, but sieve/ contains:

- the cmu library, above licence

  it calls xmalloc, at least, from the set of GPLed code in lib/, which
  would be easy to change if necessary

- implementation of the sieve engine callbacks, and a wrapper on top,
  the sv_* functions, that I wrote and placed under the LGPL, under
  the assumption that that would be OK, and its my preference for
  library code that I write anyway

- sieve/sieve.c, a sieve executable, that I licenced under LGPL as
  well. I would prefer to GPL it, but don't think I can, considering
  the GPL extends to all the code in the executable, I thought, and
  I didn't think I could extend the GPL over the CMU code.

So, my question:

- can sieve, the library or the executables, be distributed with mailutils?

I know I can pull it out of mailutils, and then distribute it myself with a
BSD (with or without clause 3) licence, linked against the LGPL mailutils
library, but obviously I'd rather it was distributed with GNU mailutils.

- can mail.local be distributed with the sieve library, when part of that
  library is CMU licenced?

Again, I know I can distribute the sieve library with some kind of licence
compatible with CMU's (BSD, say), and end users (like me) can patch a GPL
apps and use it ourselves, but we can't redistribute it, because we can't
distribute it under the GPL unless its all distributable under the GPL.

As for mu_arp_parse(), it's GPLed, so any code that calls it turns into
GPL as well, correct? So, if somebody has an app that either can't, or
they don't want, be GPLed, they cannot use it as a configuration mechanism,
they have to use some other kind of config mechanism. Do I understand
correctly?


Cheers,
Sam

-- 
Sam Roberts <address@hidden> (Vivez sans temps mort!)

COPYING
Description: Text document