Re: vm/reference classes licensed under LGPL

[Nic Ferrier]

>>> Artur Biesiadowski <address@hidden> 10-Jan-01 1:03:29 PM >>>

>For me GPL is nice license, but only for standalone static 
>programs. In today world, where everything is dynamic 
>(and especially entire java) it is too strict to be useful. 

I don't want to start a licence war here because we all have our own
views about the differences and relative merits of GPL and LGPL.

I just want to bring a GPL/Java issue into the light that some people
might be less aware of than others.


Because Java is a "standardised" platform GPL can be used to great
effect to protect investment in library code.

If you develop a GPLed version of a standard javalib (say: javamail
or swing) you can GPL the implementation code to stop other people
stealing your implementation code for proprietary projects but you
also enable normal users to use your implementation with non-GPLed
code.

This is because the GPL is all about textual inclusion and when you
develop a library with the GPL and plug it into a non-GPL app there is
no textual inclusion (because the import statements are not including
GPLed code but standard, openly available library specifications).

Even with free re-implementations of public interfaces there is a
good reason to use GPL. A good case in point is the javax.servlet
stuff developed by Paul Siegmann and Mark Wielaard (Paul and Mark's
code is LGPLed).

The servlet spec is just a bunch of abstract classes and interfaces
that don't do much at all. If the code was GPLed then you might think
that everyone using it to run servlets would have to GPL their
servlets. 

But this isn't the case. There is no textual inclusion from the
javax.servlet package into an ordinary servlet other than the
references to the servlet spec classes. Thus it's impossible to know
whether a GPLed servlet spec or the Sun version (which is Berkely
style licence) was used to develop the servlet.

In one way this is a problem for the GPL (because making something
GPL doesn't necessarily infect code anymore) but in another way it's
an opportunity. If more people use the GPL it gains a wider acceptance
and might become more popular.


Just so we don't swamp the list with licence discussions people with
comments or argument better reply to me privately.


Nic