On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 09:44:10AM +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote: > 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. What? Wait, What? What?[1] 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, and > Berkeley DB will be less and less used (or replaced by something else). Sure. Software comes and goes. Why not let it happen, who cares, it's still free software. > What we can do right now (more can apply): > [ ] 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) [ ] Do nothing because it's free software > dak rm -Rn -s unstable db-defaults db5.1 db5.3 > db-depends Again, why do you plan on removing free software from main due to a change in license? Cheers, Paul [1]: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-GfEnd4xeEJs/UOxBvCCdgGI/AAAAAAAABSU/PgL41SlEQ98/s1600/huh-what.gif -- .''`. Paul Tagliamonte <paultag@debian.org> : :' : Proud Debian Developer `. `'` 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87 `- http://people.debian.org/~paultag
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature