Hi Eric,

now, I get an idea.
But, are these libraries, we refer to (jibx, etc.) "system libraries" in the sense of the link you gave?
They are not normally part of the operating system, are they? IMHO, this exception is e.g. for
GPL und W**dos, but not for our situation.

Another idea I had: can't we put FreeMind under GPLv3, which is compatible to the Apache2.0 and
we have much less problems. From the original license, we are allowed to use any successor of GPLv2.

What do you think?

Chris

Eric Lavarde - FreeMind schrieb:
Hi Chris,

I thought that I was practical enough, but here more in details:
1. ask authorization from all copyright owners to do the following.
2. add one sentence along the lines of "The copyright holders of 
FreeMind grant a special exception in regard to the usage of non-GPL 
compatible but free libraries, as detailed in the license/copyright file."
3. in the license file, add accordingly a blurb adapted from the below 
link (the last template in the answer):

  
Linking [name of your program] statically or dynamically with other 
modules is making a combined work based on [name of your program]. 
Thus, the terms and conditions of the GNU General Public License cover 
the whole combination.

In addition, as a special exception, the copyright holders of [name of 
your program] give you permission to combine [name of your program] 
with free software programs or libraries that are released under the 
GNU LGPL and with code included in the standard release of [name of 
library] under the [name of library's license] (or modified versions 
of such code, with unchanged license). You may copy and distribute 
such a system following the terms of the GNU GPL for [name of your 
program] and the licenses of the other code concerned{, provided that 
you include the source code of that other code when and as the GNU GPL 
requires distribution of source code}.

Note that people who make modified versions of [name of your program] 
are not obligated to grant this special exception for their modified 
versions; it is their choice whether to do so. The GNU General Public 
License gives permission to release a modified version without this 
exception; this exception also makes it possible to release a modified 
version which carries forward this exception.

    


Eric

Christian Foltin (GMX) wrote:
  
2. usage of GPL-incompatible libraries: believing this FSF note 
<http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLIncompatibleLibs> (/http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLIncompatibleLibs/), 
we can make sure that FreeMind can use GPL-incompatible libraries but 
we need to make it explicit in our copyright. I (Eric L. 
<http://freemind.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php?title=User:Ewl&action=edit> 
05:56, 24 Mar 2008 (PDT))suggest to ask the current and former 
copyright holder and add a note in each source file that there is an 
exception on GPL-incompatible libraries, and explicit this exception 
in the "license" file.
      
What does this mean pratically for us?

Chris


Eric Lavarde - FreeMind schrieb:
    
Hi,

again me and licenses: I've done some more searching and documented my 
conclusions on our wiki under 
http://freemind.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php/Licensing#Licensing_of_components

Some more decisions and actions to be taken.

Let me know,
Eric

    
      


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Freemind-developer mailing list
Freemind-developer@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freemind-developer