> John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> forwarded: >> Linking: >> Bacula may be linked with any libraries permitted under the GPL, >> or with any non-GPLed libraries, including OpenSSL, that are >> required for its proper functioning, providing the source code of >> those non-GPLed libraries is non-proprietary and freely >> available to the public. > > Licence proliferation suggestion: use something similar to the > FSF's OpenSSL permission. Here is one from Wget I have here: > > In addition, as a special exception, the Free Software Foundation > gives permission to link the code of its release of Wget with the > OpenSSL project's "OpenSSL" library (or with modified versions of it > that use the same license as the "OpenSSL" library), and distribute > the linked executables. You must obey the GNU General Public License > in all respects for all of the code used other than "OpenSSL". If you > modify this file, you may extend this exception to your version of the > file, but you are not obligated to do so. If you do not wish to do > so, delete this exception statement from your version. > > > Not that I think yours is bad, but I think this could be combined > with others using the same phrasing more easily. > > +1 to comments about non-OpenSSL-permitting code uncertainty.
Thanks for the comments. As long as what I currently have is acceptable, I think I will stay with it, because it isn't clear to me that I have any permission from the Free Software Foundation, and because I'd rather focus on programming than the license. Best regards, Kern -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
