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

Re: Bug#40937: omniorb: Freeness?

On Wed, Jul 07, 1999 at 11:45:27 -0700, Brent Fulgham wrote:
>    OmniORB and TAO both are licensed as Free -- GPL/LGPL combinations by
>    their respective creators.  Consequently, omniorb and TAO have
>    historically been deemed "Free".
>    However, we recently realized that the following licensing terms
>    were present in the IDL compiler, which contains some SUN Microsystems
>    code:

Is the IDL compiler a separate part of the OmniORB and TAO packages, or do
they contain GPL-ed changes for it? (If it's the latter, I think it's the
same regrettable situation as KDE, i.e. not redistributable in binary form)

>    The obvious problem with the above is that the redistribution terms are
>    not DFSG-compatible.


>    I originally thought to put omniorb and omniorb-doc in "contrib" and
>    the devel part in "non-free".  Unfortunately, our system does not allow
>    a "non-free" source package to create free and non-free parts. So I
>    ended up placing everything in "non-free".

Putting the IDL compiler in a source package of its own could fix this.

>    Happily, this is a temporary state of affairs, as ORL (creators of
>    omniORB) are rewriting the IDL compiler from scratch.  The new version
>    will not include any SUN code, and will be entirely DFSG-free.


>    I should also point out that the OmniORB folks are a bit put out that
>    we are calling their product non-free.  I would like to be able to get
>    at least parts of it back into "main" in the very near future.

Please use separate source packages for the free and non-free parts then.

Cyberspace, a final frontier. These are the voyages of my messages, 
on a lightspeed mission to explore strange new systems and to boldly go
where no data has gone before. 

Reply to: