On Wed, Nov 08, 2017 at 03:53:32PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> >   I don't think static linking against libcups is common enough to be a
> >   serious concern - CUPS is fairly ubiquitous and easily falls under the
> >   "OS-supplied library" exception in the GPL 2.  And existing GPL-2-only
> >   software that *does* statically link/copy CUPS code can continue to do
> >   so with CUPS 2.2.x and earlier.
> 
> Someone should reply to that that the OS exception only applies when
> distributing binaries separate from said OS, not for binaries bundled
> with the OS, which all Linux distros are  (AFAIK, IANAL).

I'm willing to reply to this, but before I (or anyone else) does so, I 
think it highly prudent to have fedora-legal weigh in first.

> IMHO some sort of ASL / LGPL dual license would be best (if upstream
> is willing to make such a change).

Agreed, but even if the CUPS authors are personally in favor of this I 
suspect that it will never happen, given Apple's heavy anti-GPL bias.

 - Solomon
-- 
Solomon Peachy                         pizza at shaftnet dot org
Coconut Creek, FL                          ^^ (email/xmpp) ^^
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Reply via email to