Re: RFS: poco
On (13/01/07 22:12), Krzysztof Burghardt wrote:
> Daniel Baumann wrote:
> > btw, just curious: are there any reasons to not use the -ssl tarball
> > from upstream?
> This problem is known as "OpenSSL and GPL software". What happen if
> there is a GPL software (and I'm not copyright holder). I extend its
> functionality using POCO classes (assumes that POCO is linked against
> OpenSSL). Will copyright holders claim that I infringe on their rights?
> This can be enough complicated without SSL as some parts of POCO have 4
> clauses (while other 3 clauses) BSD license. So maybe we do not need to
If poco has parts GPL and parts 4-BSD then you have the problem without
even getting OpenSSL involved.
James Westby -- GPG Key ID: B577FE13 -- http://jameswestby.net/
seccure key - (3+)k7|M*edCX/.A:n*N!>|&7U.L#9E)Tu)T0>AM - secp256r1/nistp256