AW: Fw: GPL / LGPL

Thanks for your answers, Per and Kai! Now, the Ozone licensing is
absolutely clear! Under these circumstances Ozone is definitely an
option for us - we will think about it. :)

Regarding a potentially integration effort, I've got two questions:

1. How many developers are involved in the Ozone project? Probably there
are only a few core developers...? Is that right? How many? Who? Have
other people contributed little code to the Ozone database additionally?
How many are involved alltogether?

2. How does your mapping between objects and disk space work? I know,
that you use some kind of serialization mechanism. Nevertheless a
database system should know about pages ... As Ozone has no query
facility do you optimize the object storage task in a way that nearby
objects are stored on the same page so that navigation in an object
graph is optmized?

Best regards,
Christian


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] Im Auftrag von Per
Nyfelt
Gesendet: Dienstag, 14. Juni 2005 12:26
An: [email protected]
Cc: Kai Schutte; [email protected]
Betreff: Re: [Ozone-users] Fw: GPL / LGPL

These are good points. I think that it should be OK for anyone,
commercial or 
not to create Ozone based applications without forcing them to comply to
any 
type of licensing restrictions. This is how i understand LGPL and this
is why 
the public api (the one that the client i.e. the Ozone based app is
using) is 
LGPL. However if modifications to the actual Ozone code is made these 
modifications should be given back to the community. Also if someone
takes 
the Ozone codebase and decides to fork this fork should be open source.
This 
is why the Ozone core is GPL. This means in short

1. It is OK to ship commercial apps based on Ozone without having to
open 
source the app. In fact I would encourage more commercial Ozone Based
apps!

2. If changes to Ozone is needed for the commercial application those
changes 
need to be either GPL or LGPL depending on if the change is in the
public API 
or in the core. The best way for the commercial vendor to make sure 
improvements gets incorporated into the mainstream code is to get
involved in 
the development of Ozone. We are in the process of figuring out a way to

receive donations (through the SourceForge donation system). This would
be 
another way to give back to the developers of Ozone and let them benefit
from 
some of the profit generated by a successfull commercial, Ozone-based
app.


Coming back to the questions posed by Christian Merenda:
>Which license corresponds to which part of the database system?
As explained above. Clients interact with LGPL code. The public (LGPL)
api 
interacts with the Core, which is GPL.

> >If you_re restraining the core to the GPL, ozone would be no option
for
> >everybody who plans to distribute a commercial and proprietary
> >application.
Sure it would. As long as you do not modify the Ozone code and only
interact 
with the public api you're perfectly fine.

> > We´re strongly contributed to Open Source and we´re planning to give
> > our work back to the Open Source Community under the GPL. So it´s
> > absolutely free to use in the Open Source Environment. Additionally
we
> > will offer a proprietary, commercial license for the rest of the
> > industrie. Can we do this with Ozone in the back-end? Do you offer
the
> > product under the LGPL?

Yes you're code talks to the Ozone API which is LGPL. Thus linking to an
Ozone 
back end poses no restrictions on how you license your code (be it GPL,
APL, 
commercial or whatever)

> >
> > Additionally it could be interesting for you to tightly integrate
> > Ozone with our product. If we work together, we can squeeze out the
> > maximum amount of performance of an ODBMS with the highest level of
> > abstraction ever seen on the market. What do you think about this?

Sounds interesting. Please elaborate!

Best regards,
Per



Monday 13 June 2005 12.19 skrev Kai Schutte:
> I recently asked MySQL directly about a similar question. The MySQL
> server itself is GPL, and the server also can be compiled as a library
> that can be directly linked with other code. The 'connectors', ie the
> drivers which manage a connection to MySQL are also GPL, which means
> that any application that you write that either links with the library
> version of the server or any of the drivers they provide must also be
> GPL, *unless* you purchase their commercial license. This also means
> that if you write your own connector which handles a network
connection
> to the MySQL server, you do not need your code to be GPL nor purchase
a
> commercial license, as your code doesn't link with anything GPL.
>
> The hitch with GPL is that anything that links to it must also be GPL.
> It is a violation of the license to link and LGPL code with GPL code.
> (Of course, if you're the author, you're allowed to do that, because
> you're the only person who can sue yourself). Linking Bob's
proprietary
> code with Alice's LGPL code which links with Alice's GPL code is a
clear
> violation. The only way you can use a GPL database server with
> proprietary code is through a network connection.
>
> Hence, if the product that Christian Meranda is working on would
require
> linking to GPL code (within the same application space) and this code
is
> to be redistributed under the GPL, all is good. But, if they want to
> resell a commercial license for their clients to use their product
which
> includes Ozone GPL code, that's obviously a violation, because
Christian
> Merenda is distributing his work under a different license which links
> to GPL code and the GPL doesn't allow that. The only solution here is
if
> Ozone itself would be distributed under a different license.
>
> In my opinion, if Christian Merenda wants to sell his work which
relies
> on Ozone being in the same application space, aren't Ozone developpers
> entitled to some share of the funds? (ie, make a commercial license
> scheme for Ozone).
>
> -kai
>
> (btw, I'm not an Ozone dev, I'm just thinking out loud :) )
>
> Gerd Mueller wrote:
> >Begin forwarded message:
> >
> >Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 17:25:14 +0200
> >From: "Christian Merenda" <[email protected]>
> >To: <[email protected]>
> >Subject: GPL / LGPL
> >
> >
> >Dear sir / madam,
> >
> >on your website  <http://www.ozone-db.org/> www.ozone-db.org you have
to
> >licenses _Ozone Library License_ and _Ozone Core License_. The first
is
> >essentially based on the LGPL, the second one on the GPL.
> >
> >So I do not understand which license is the right one or better to
say:
> >Which license corresponds to which part of the database system?
> >
> >If you_re restraining the core to the GPL, ozone would be no option
for
> >everybody who plans to distribute a commercial and proprietary
> >application.
> >
> >In our special case, we have developed a very smart object-oriented
> >database metamodel and API, which could be implemented on top of
> >different back-ends. We_ve done already for JBoss and Ozone is
another
> >option for us. As our model-driven architecture approach is extremely
> >powerful and complemented with a best-of-class IDE it could give
Ozone a
> >boost in widespread application.
> >
> >We_re strongly contributed to Open Source and we_re planning to give
our
> >work back to the Open Source Community under the GPL. So it_s
absolutely
> >free to use in the Open Source Environment. Additionally we will
offer a
> >proprietary, commercial license for the rest of the industrie. Can we
do
> >this with Ozone in the back-end? Do you offer the product under the
> >LGPL?
> >
> >Additionally it could be interesting for you to tightly integrate
Ozone
> >with our product. If we work together, we can squeeze out the maximum
> >amount of performance of an ODBMS with the highest level of
abstraction
> >ever seen on the market. What do you think about this?
> >
> >Best regards,
> >Christian Merenda
> >
> >----------------------------
> >Christian Merenda
> >Franz-Joseph-Str. 7
> >80801 München
> >
> >Tel.: 0 89/82 90 97-17
> >Fax: 0 89/82 90 97-18
> >E-Mail:  <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]
> >Web:  <http://www.merenda.de> www.merenda.de
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >----------------------------------------------------------------
> >Gerd Mueller                                    [email protected]
> >SMB GmbH                                  http://www.smb-tec.com
> >
> >
> >!DSPAM:42ad353e230183574914120!
> >
> >
> >
> >
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Dear sir / madam,
> >
> > on your website www.ozone-db.org <http://www.ozone-db.org/> you have
> > to licenses „Ozone Library License” and „Ozone Core License“. The
> > first is essentially based on the LGPL, the second one on the GPL.
> >
> > So I do not understand which license is the right one or better to
> > say: Which license corresponds to which part of the database system?
> >
> > If you’re restraining the core to the GPL, ozone would be no option
> > for everybody who plans to distribute a commercial and proprietary
> > application.
> >
> > In our special case, we have developed a very smart object-oriented
> > database metamodel and API, which could be implemented on top of
> > different back-ends. We´ve done already for JBoss and Ozone is
another
> > option for us. As our model-driven architecture approach is
extremely
> > powerful and complemented with a best-of-class IDE it could give
Ozone
> > a boost in widespread application.
> >
> > We´re strongly contributed to Open Source and we´re planning to give
> > our work back to the Open Source Community under the GPL. So it´s
> > absolutely free to use in the Open Source Environment. Additionally
we
> > will offer a proprietary, commercial license for the rest of the
> > industrie. Can we do this with Ozone in the back-end? Do you offer
the
> > product under the LGPL?
> >
> > Additionally it could be interesting for you to tightly integrate
> > Ozone with our product. If we work together, we can squeeze out the
> > maximum amount of performance of an ODBMS with the highest level of
> > abstraction ever seen on the market. What do you think about this?
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Christian Merenda
> >
> > ----------------------------
> >
> > Christian Merenda
> >
> > Franz-Joseph-Str. 7
> >
> > 80801 München
> >
> > Tel.: 0 89/82 90 97-17
> >
> > Fax: 0 89/82 90 97-18
> >
> > E-Mail: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> >
> > Web: www.merenda.de <http://www.merenda.de>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by: NEC IT Guy Games.  How far can you
> shotput a projector? How fast can you ride your desk chair down the
office
> luge track? If you want to score the big prize, get to know the little
guy.
> Play to win an NEC 61" plasma display: http://www.necitguy.com/?r
> _______________________________________________
> Ozone-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ozone-users


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: NEC IT Guy Games.  How far can you
shotput
a projector? How fast can you ride your desk chair down the office luge
track?
If you want to score the big prize, get to know the little guy.  
Play to win an NEC 61" plasma display: http://www.necitguy.com/?r 
_______________________________________________
Ozone-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ozone-users



-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id492&op=click