marius aamodt eriksen
marius at umich.edu
Fri Aug 16 07:18:01 CEST 2002
* Marcus Brinkmann <Marcus.Brinkmann at ruhr-uni-bochum.de> [020815 23:23]:
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2002 at 12:57:22PM -0400, Niels Provos wrote:
> > He would like to link his BSD-licensed code against gpgme. As gpgme
> > is GPL, that would make his code automatically GPL, too.
> As was repeatedly said in this thread, this is not true. The GPL applies to
> the combined work, he can still choose to dual license his code under
> whatever other licenses he wants to provide it under.
but my code would be unusable if it isn't combined. so effectively it
furthermore, i have spoken to many people about this since our last
encounter - people that are heavily involved in open source software,
and they all agree with me.
> > Sorry, your indoctrination by Stallman seems not yet complete. Marius
> > is well known for developing and releasing free software. Calling him
> > a hoarder seems very undiplomatic.
> Although I can see how you can read this into what I wrote, my intention was
> not about Marius (please read again the sentence in parenthesis). The
> problem with the LPGL and other less restrictive licenses is that they help
> hoarders, whoever they are.
i assume by hoarders, you mean people who use your software, what's
bad about people using your software?
> Your criticism doesn't reach its target, for a simple reason. There is no
> conflict between the modified BSD license and the GPL. If all you want is
> to combine two such works, you are free to do so, and we do it in many
> projects with a huge success.
again, as i stated before, this seems to be untrue; if it WAS true,
then why was ximian forced to use another solution when they needed
PGP integration in evolution? they were not interesting in modifying
gpgme, only in using it for a solution which could have commercial
extensions. to me, this seems to be the exact same situation; no
conflict by your argument, but ximian somehow, who i am sure have a
very careful legal department, decided they could not use gpgme, go
also, FYI - since our last encounter, i have implemented my own PGP
API, named libpgpwrap; it is modular, flexible and simple. it
supports a number of pgp implementations as its backend (currently
PGP5, GnuPG in the works, PGP2 next). honestly i believe the
interface i have come up with is superior to gpgme's; it is intuitive
and significantly less complex than gpgme's. using pgpwrap i can
implement a full PGP client (sign, encrypt, verify) in about 80 lines
of code. gpgme seems to have overdone a few things, and libpgpwrap
simplifies without compromising functionality of flexibility. and,
after pgpwrap matures, it is possible i will use tom zerucha's openpgp
implementation (which i can distribute with libpgpwrap) as a backend;
making pgpwrap completely independent of any other implementation.
libpgpwrap, of course, is under a BSD style license.
perhaps this is a demonstration of how truly free software will evolve
> marius at umich.edu > http://www.citi.umich.edu/u/marius
More information about the Gnupg-devel