Xapian discuss - Jul 2007 - licensing requirements for using the SWIG bindings

Hi,

I'm confused about my licensing obligation with respect to the Xapian
SWIG bindings.

I've got a python wrapper that sits above the standard Xapian
Python/SWIG bindings, and I wasn't sure if the *intent* of the Xapian
team is that my python wrapper - and any code that also uses my
wrapper also falls under GPLv2.

It seems unclear if the FSF's position on dynamic linking in Python
constitutes 'real' linking, but I'd rather just do what the Xapian
team expects.

Is it (reasonably) safe to assume that the library will *not* get
upgraded to GPLv3 since copyright for various pieces belong to many
parties?

thanks,
vic

-- 
"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by
stupidity."  - Hanlon's Razor

On Tue, 2007-07-24 at 09:35 -0400, Victor Ng wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I'm confused about my licensing obligation with respect to the Xapian
> SWIG bindings.
> 
> I've got a python wrapper that sits above the standard Xapian
> Python/SWIG bindings, and I wasn't sure if the *intent* of the Xapian
> team is that my python wrapper - and any code that also uses my
> wrapper also falls under GPLv2.
> 
> It seems unclear if the FSF's position on dynamic linking in Python
> constitutes 'real' linking, but I'd rather just do what the
Xapian
> team expects.
Hmm, IANAL but the first 'feature' listed on Xapian's Wbsite:
 - Free Software/Open Source - licensed under the GPL.
 
Note - this is GPL, _not_ LGPL so the question isn't really about
linking vs. plug-in vs. derived work.  Start your application and do an 
'% lsof <pid-of-your-app> | grep  libxapian

 HTH R. Mattes




 
> 
> Is it (reasonably) safe to assume that the library will *not* get
> upgraded to GPLv3 since copyright for various pieces belong to many
> parties?
> 
> thanks,
> vic
>

Victor Ng wrote:
> I'm confused about my licensing obligation with respect to the Xapian
> SWIG bindings.
> 
> I've got a python wrapper that sits above the standard Xapian
> Python/SWIG bindings, and I wasn't sure if the *intent* of the Xapian
> team is that my python wrapper - and any code that also uses my
> wrapper also falls under GPLv2.
> 
> It seems unclear if the FSF's position on dynamic linking in Python
> constitutes 'real' linking, but I'd rather just do what the
Xapian
> team expects.
I think the FSFs position is that there's nothing special about dynamic 
linking that means that the linked program is not a derived work. 
However, I would agree that the subject of exactly what a derived work 
is is a bit vague.

My personal view is that a python wrapper around the Xapian python 
bindings must be licensed under terms compatible with the GPL, or a 
license which puts no additional restrictions in place (and, of course, 
the conditions of the GPL will apply to your python code).
> Is it (reasonably) safe to assume that the library will *not* get
> upgraded to GPLv3 since copyright for various pieces belong to many
> parties?
I believe the files are licensed under the GPLv2 with an option to use 
any later version, so the project may be able to change to GPLv3 in 
future.  We've not discussed doing so, though, and I may be wrong about 
the current licensing.

Ideally, I'd like to relicense the whole project under the LGPL, but 
this is unlikely to happen in the forseable future.

-- 
Richard