Re: RFS: cobertura

[Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org>]

Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org> writes:
> Le Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 09:15:54PM -0430, Miguel Landaeta a écrit :

>> Upstream clarify this in her website
>> (http://cobertura.sourceforge.net/license.html ):

>> Because ant tasks are loaded directly into the runtime of ant, and the
>> GPL is incompatable with all versions of the Apache Software License,
>> ant tasks can not be licensed under the GPL.

> this information is outdated as the GPL version 3 is compatible with the
> Apache License version 2.0, see:
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html

I believe that FAQ explicitly supports the statement Miguel posts above.

    Apache 2 software can therefore be included in GPLv3 projects, because
    the GPLv3 license accepts our software into GPLv3 works. However,
    GPLv3 software cannot be included in Apache projects. The licenses are
    incompatible in one direction only, and it is a result of ASF's
    licensing philosophy and the GPLv3 authors' interpretation of
    copyright law.

    This licensing incompatibility applies *only* when some Apache project
    software becomes a derivative work of some GPLv3 software, because
    then the Apache software would have to be distributed under
    GPLv3. This would be incompatible with ASF's requirement that all
    Apache software must be distributed under the Apache License 2.0.

    We avoid GPLv3 software because merely linking to it is considered by
    the GPLv3 authors to create a derivative work. We want to honor their
    license. Unless GPLv3 licensors relax this interpretation of their own
    license regarding linking, our licensing philosophies are
    fundamentally incompatible. This is an identical issue for both GPLv2
    and GPLv3.

This is exactly the situation that Miguel is concerned about.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>