#3432 closed bug (wontfix)
License conflict with GPLv3+ libs
| Reported by: | volter | Owned by: | nobody |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | major: does not work as expected | Milestone: | Version 1.7.0 |
| Component: | Build/Install | Version: | Trunk |
| Keywords: | Cc: | timlinux, ♫, dave.dehaan@… | |
| Must Fix for Release: | No | Platform: | All |
| Platform Version: | Awaiting user input: | no |
Description
QGIS currently links two libraries, that are incompatible with QGIS' GPLv2+:
- Libspatialite (GPLv3+)
- Sqlanywhere (GPLv3+)
Linking a GPLv2+ program to GPLv3 libraries requires a switch to GPLv3+, as far as I can see.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#GPL_Compatibility_Matrix
Change History (12)
comment:1 by , 13 years ago
comment:2 by , 13 years ago
Huh? libspatialite has always been on the Mozilla license, still is as of 2.4rc4. The spatialite tools and rasterlite use GPLv3, but those are not used in QGIS.
comment:3 by , 13 years ago
Kyngchaos, you're right about Libspatialite. I mixed that up with the tools and the other stuff.
But I still think, there is a conflict with Sqlanywhere's license.
follow-up: 7 comment:4 by , 13 years ago
| Cc: | added |
|---|
Can anyone confirm this? Is so, I think we should drop SQLAnywhere support before releasing 1.7
comment:5 by , 13 years ago
libpal's version in Trunk is also GPLv3+, according to the headers.
The website states LPGL3, maybe they changed it for newer versions. If pal was only linked, it would be OK with GPLv2+.
But as far as I know, it was changed and changes did not go upstream. I'll try to help with that, as time allows.
comment:7 by , 13 years ago
| Cc: | added |
|---|
Replying to pcav:
Can anyone confirm this? Is so, I think we should drop SQLAnywhere support before releasing 1.7
Please note this was discussed in a private thread with the plugin developer before he contributed the code. I encouraged Dave to hold the discussions publicly which he did as soon as their lawyers gave the go ahead.
As Marco mentions above, our understanding is that it is ok for GPL v2 code to link to and include code with a later version of the GPL license.
Sybase have really gone out of their way to contribute their code the 'right' way and removing their plugin would not be a very generous or sympathetic move on our part.
It is our hope that Sybase's intiative may spur other proprietary geospatial database developers to copy suite and contribute open source client software for their systems. This would go a long way towards getting QGIS into the enterprise.
We are not licensing gurus, but lets find a way to make this work if there is a bona fide issue.
Regards
Tim
comment:8 by , 13 years ago
I still think it is no problem, because the QGIS code is under GPL2+. The important thing is the distribution of the program. It says in the header files: "you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version". So if you are building packages (e.g. for Fedora), you redistribute them under GPL3 (any later version) and it should be ok.
Regards, Marco
comment:9 by , 13 years ago
| Resolution: | → wontfix |
|---|---|
| Status: | new → closed |
Closing this bug after IRC discussion with volter. Result is that currently the only way to distribute QGIS is under GPL3 (most files are under GPLV2+, but PAL and sqlanywhere are GPLV3+).
Hm, my interpretation from http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#v2v3Compatibility is that it should be possible:
'Is GPLv3 compatible with GPLv2? No ... However, if code is released under GPL “version 2 or later,” that is compatible with GPLv3 because GPLv3 is one of the options it permits '