On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 09:44:10AM +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote:What? Wait, What? What?
> Florian Weimer has correctly pointed out that Oracle has decided to change the
> BDB 6.0 license to AGPLv3 (https://oss.oracle.com/pipermail/bdb/2013-June/
> 000056.html). This hasn't been reflected in release tarball (probably by
> mistake), but since the AGPLv3 is not very friendly to downstream projects, we
> (as the Debian project) need to take a decision.
The AGPL is a DFSG free FSF approved and OSI approved free software
license? We made a decision, it's *free software* and fit for main.
> My opinion is that this Oracle move just sent the Berkeley DB to oblivion, andSure. Software comes and goes. Why not let it happen, who cares, it's
> Berkeley DB will be less and less used (or replaced by something else).
still free software.
> What we can do right now (more can apply):[ ] Do nothing because it's free software
> [ ] Keep db5.3 for jessie
> [ ] Keep db5.3 for jessie+
> [ ] Keep db5.3 forever
> [ ] Suck it and relicense the downstream software as appropriate
> [ ] Block db6.0 and higher from entering Debian
> [ ] Remove Berkeley DB support from jessie+
> [ ] Remove Berkeley DB support from jessie++
> [ ] Replace Berkeley DB with free alternative [*]
> [ ] Somebody writes a BDB-compatible wrapper around the free alternative(s)
Again, why do you plan on removing free software from main due to a
> dak rm -Rn -s unstable db-defaults db5.1 db5.3 > db-depends
change in license?