classpathx-discuss
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Classpathx-discuss] GPL + lib exception: headers say ... what?


From: David Brownell
Subject: [Classpathx-discuss] GPL + lib exception: headers say ... what?
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 11:08:01 -0700

Turns out that "libgcj" doesn't do what I (mis)remembered it to do:

* Top level has a "LIBGCJ_LICENCE" file
* Each Java source file has a header referring to that.

Both of these are appended below.  I also found a partially relevant
entry in the GPL FAQ:

  http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#WritingFSWithNFLibs

That suggests appending such "special exception" clauses to the
GPL clause, but it's directed to programs not to libraries.

Some questions for ClasspathX (sub)projects:

    - Shouldn't there be a GPL FAQ entry for this "library exception"?
       (And shouldn't the GPL FAQ get some better organization than
       "flat list of 70+ questions", to make it easier to find such entries? :)

    - Should we have a corresponding CLASSPATHX_LICENSE?
       Or should each (sub)project have its own, like GNUJAXP_LICENSE?
       Or should we directly use LIBGCJ_LICENSE?
       Or should there be a generic GNU-wide version?
       Or should the exception be part of each classpathx header?

    - The "this file is part of..." claim seems to suggest that the library
       is licensed as a whole, so that parts can't be "cherry picked" by
       non-Free software except by a static linker.  Is that the intended
       (and presumably "legally correct") interpretation?  Seems putting
       the exception into each classpathx header might change that, unless
       it were carefully crafted.  Versioning would seem to complicate
       this too ... adding/removing files, and so on.

Using "LIBGCJ_LICENSE" has some advantages, including making it
easier to merge software into libgcj, but that "part of ..." claim raises
other questions.

I don't know the history behind the original "library exception" language,
such as why LGPL isn't just "GPL + library exception", so comments
from more knowledgeable folk would be appreciated.

- Dave





-------    header in Java source code
/* Copyright (C) 1998, 1999  Free Software Foundation

   This file is part of libgcj.

This software is copyrighted work licensed under the terms of the
Libgcj License.  Please consult the file "LIBGCJ_LICENSE" for
details.  */
 
-------    LIBGCJ_LICENSE
March 7, 2000

The libgcj library is licensed under the terms of the GNU General
Public License, with this special exception:

    As a special exception, if you link this library with other files
    to produce an executable, this library does not by itself cause
    the resulting executable to be covered by the GNU General Public
    License.  This exception does not however invalidate any other
    reasons why the executable file might be covered by the GNU
    General Public License.

You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
along with libjava; see the file COPYING.  If not, write to the
Free Software Foundation, 59 Temple Place - Suite 330,
Boston, MA 02111-1307, USA.






reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]