Actually eXist is a bit of a mish-mash of licences...
Any parts of eXist I have authored will be under the BSD licence where =
indicated, as I much prefer that over GPL or LGPL.
But eXist also in places has borrowed code from other projects and these =
have their licences indicated as appropriate, I saw one today that was =
under the Apache licence - FastByteBuffer.java for example.
Also there are plenty of third party jar's that eXist makes use of that =
are released under various different licences.
So its a bit of a mixed bag...
From: exist-open-bounces@... on behalf of Alex =
Sent: Thu 8/24/2006 10:27 PM
Subject: Re: [Exist-open] Licence, cost and obligations
Ismael Fernando Flores wrote:
> i'm interest by the eXist DB XML for commercial purpuses, like db =
> for stanalone applications in Java.
> the licence have cost?
eXist is open-source and so free.
> if my system use eXist like db server, my system must be GNU GPL?
eXist is released under LGPL and not GPL.
> if I modify the eXist source code?
In theory, you'd have to distribute that change under LGPL.
Of course, we'd like it if you contributed back to the project.
> it have same specific support?
I'm not sure I understand the question.
It sounds like you just want to use eXist verbatim embedded in another
software application. As such, LGPL will let you do that without any
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, =
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job =
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache =
Exist-open mailing list
From: Wolfgang Meier <wolfgangmm@gm...> - 2006-08-24 23:11:28
> Actually eXist is a bit of a mish-mash of licences...
For the database core or the query engine itself there should be no
doubt that it is LGPL, even though it links with non-GPL libraries.
> Any parts of eXist I have authored will be under the BSD licence where
> indicated, as I much prefer that over GPL or LGPL.
I won't object if extension modules (which are clearly marked as such)
use a different license. Contributions to the core should remain LGPL
though. Just to avoid any confusion.
> But eXist also in places has borrowed code from other projects and these
> have their licences indicated as appropriate, I saw one today that was under
> the Apache licence - FastByteBuffer.java for example.
There are some rare cases where I adopted single classes written by
other people. I found it appropriate to include a reference to the
original author and the license under which their code was published.
However, 99% of the code were written by us and not copied from other
sources, though I will always readily admit that e.g. saxon has been a
major source of inspiration.
Finally, my position concerning licenses has always been tolerant:
though I like the GPL/LGPL I would probably have been willing to
switch to a different license in the past. However, nobody really
tried to convince me, so I'm happy with the LGPL ;-)