[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [open-cobol-list] libdb Licensing - READ

From: David Essex
Subject: Re: [open-cobol-list] libdb Licensing - READ
Date: Sun May 1 12:43:11 2005
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.1b) Gecko/20020722

Roger While wrote:

Good news on Berkeley DB licensing.
I have been in contact with Sleepycat.
The current situation is detailed in the E-Mail
communication below.
More to follow including (I hope) the explicit allowance
to use db with Cobol.

The short answer to your question is, we'd normally consider the
use you outline below to require a proprietary license for Berkeley
DB.  If a third party writes an application that links the COBOL
ISAM library, then that app is using Berkeley DB; it would have
to be available in open source form, or would need a paid
proprietary license.

However, there is not much business advantage to Sleepycat in
requiring that this specific case adhere to the terms of our
public license.  The amount of money we'd make from users building
COBOL ISAM apps would be small.  Most likely, we'd simply drive
people away from our software.

As a result, Sleepycat is willing to permit use of these COBOL
libraries, including Berkeley DB, in proprietary or open source
apps at no charge.  We're able to write you a variance letter
that makes that explicit if you like.

While this is an interesting offer, the fundamental problem remains.

As soon as you include the BDB header (version 2.x and above), it's license terms are in conflict with the OC Run-Time license (LGPL).

Furthermore, if you make BDB (version 2.x and above) a requirement, all users will be bound by the terms and conditions of the new license and not the LGPL.

Even if you do adopt BDB (version 2.x and above) as a requirement for the OC RTL, will it resolve all the ISAM support problems or issues.
- Transaction support
- ISAM standard compatibility

No it will not, and more code will be required.

So what is the advantage ?

Anyway my 2 cents worth.

reply via email to

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