Re: Bacula and OpenSSL

[Kern Sibbald <kern@sibbald.com>]

Hello,

To follow up on this: as of 5 September, Bacula source code is free of third 
party copyrighted code that is GPLed.  Doing so, did unfortunately create a 
good deal of instability, which we are dealing with.  However, for the future 
(probably version 3.0.0), we will be able to use OpenSSL code without any 
license infringements.

As far as I can see, the project has the following ways to proceed:

1. Add a modification to our existing license that permits linking with 
OpenSSL.

2. Add a modification to our existing license that permits linking with any 
OSI software.

3. Dual licensing Bacula with GPLv2 and some other license that permits 
linking with OpenSSL.

4. Switching from GPLv2 to some other license that permits linking with 
OpenSSL.

I would be interested in your opinions on which way we should go, and if 
anyone has any suggestions for the wording for item #1 above, it certainly 
seems to me to be the minimalist way of proceeding for at least the moment.

The old text that I had some time ago, which probably goes under possibility 
#2 was:

Linking:
Bacula may be linked with any libraries permitted under the GPL,
or with any non-GPLed libraries, including OpenSSL, that are
required for its proper functioning, providing the source code of
those non-GPLed libraries is non-proprietary and freely
available to the public.



Best regards,

Kern