8 ms·

It's not necessarily about being "one program". It's this part: "The “Corresponding Source” for a work in object code form means all the source code needed to

by mattdm 2y ago

It's not necessarily about being "one program". It's this part: "The “Corresponding Source” for a work in object code form means all the source code needed to generate, install, and (for an executable work) run the object code and to modify the work, including scripts to control those activities." I get that it's really hard to make money as an open source company. (That's why I am one of your paying customers.) The exclusion you are putting on your SDK seems very similar to that of the "bitkeeper" version control software used for the Linux kernel for a short time. Look how that turned out.

atanasi 2y ago
FSF has published a commentary: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#MereAggregation https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#MereAggregation GPL licenses have allowed so-called "mere aggregation", where separate programs are distributed together. Such programs don't have to be all covered by GPL. On the other hand, if parts are intimately tied to each other such that they are effectively a single program, GPL applies to the whole. The FSF commentary explains that the judgment depends both on the mechanisms and the semantics of the co-operation. Technical implementation details don't make programs separate if they are intimately designed to work together: "But if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two parts as combined into a larger program."
- chme 2y ago
  So they either have to license their SDK with a GPLv3 compatible license as well, or have to change the license of the client to a non-GPL one. In the latter case, IIUC their CLA (https://cla-assistant.io/bitwarden/clients https://cla-assistant.io/bitwarden/clients) allows to do change the license unilaterally. (Not a legal expert, so please correct me if I am wrong.) If so, then I feel strengthened again in my conviction that permissive licenses (as well as closed-source licenses) and CLAs are bad for both users and developers and should be avoided, if possible.
- Sammi 2y ago
  You are siddstepping the issue and answering in bad faith and you know it. What do people actually want to hear from you?
  - notpushkin 2y ago
    Their answer actually sounds alright to me. What is your problem with it, exactly?

by mattdm 2y ago

atanasi 2y ago

FSF has published a commentary: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#MereAggregation https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#MereAggregation GPL licenses have allowed so-called "mere aggregation", where separate programs are distributed together. Such programs don't have to be all covered by GPL. On the other hand, if parts are intimately tied to each other such that they are effectively a single program, GPL applies to the whole. The FSF commentary explains that the judgment depends both on the mechanisms and the semantics of the co-operation. Technical implementation details don't make programs separate if they are intimately designed to work together: "But if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two parts as combined into a larger program."

chme 2y ago
So they either have to license their SDK with a GPLv3 compatible license as well, or have to change the license of the client to a non-GPL one. In the latter case, IIUC their CLA (https://cla-assistant.io/bitwarden/clients https://cla-assistant.io/bitwarden/clients) allows to do change the license unilaterally. (Not a legal expert, so please correct me if I am wrong.) If so, then I feel strengthened again in my conviction that permissive licenses (as well as closed-source licenses) and CLAs are bad for both users and developers and should be avoided, if possible.
Sammi 2y ago
You are siddstepping the issue and answering in bad faith and you know it. What do people actually want to hear from you?
- notpushkin 2y ago
  Their answer actually sounds alright to me. What is your problem with it, exactly?