On Fri, Mar 22 2024 at 02:44:33 PM +01:00:00, Kevin Kofler via devel <devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
Once concern I have with this is the use of LGPL 3.0 *only*. This will not be compatible with a GPL 4 or newer. (The upgrade clause in the LGPLv2 that allowed that was unfortunately dropped in the LGPLv3, now you have to put the "or later" clause on the LGPLed code to be compatible with newer GPL
versions.)

So I'm not an expert on redis, but it's primarily accessed via sockets, so the license doesn't actually matter for most users. I expect it will probably be fine regardless of the choice of license (as long as it doesn't go crazy and use AGPL).

But redis also has "modules" and I'm not familiar with them. The modules were switched back to BSD-3-Clause yesterday after I complained to Neal and then Neal complained to Drew:

https://codeberg.org/redict/redict/commit/d47ce2f24063728c09c3449e5deef3eddb9eceec

But I'm not sure how much that really achieves. If the modules also link to LGPL-3.0-only code, then that probably accomplishes nothing.

I agree that most GPL or LPGL projects won't be willing to touch anything that uses an -only license rather than an -or-later license because the risk of not being able to "upgrade" the license in the future is extreme and prohibitive. And of course permissively-licensed projects will not touch anything that uses LGPL-3.0-only or LGPL-3.0-or-later anyway. But as long as there is the IPC/socket boundary in the middle, most programs should be fine. I wonder about these modules, though....

Michael

--
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Reply via email to