How does the GPL apply to the freeradius plugins? I want to create a freeradius plugin (completely my code), but does the GPL apply to it? I ask because dynamic linking is a very gray area in the GPL field. Thanks for your answer, Steven
Steven Van Ingelgem wrote:
How does the GPL apply to the freeradius plugins? I want to create a freeradius plugin (completely my code), but does the GPL apply to it? I ask because dynamic linking is a very gray area in the GPL field.
I don't see why. (2) b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License. ... These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those sections when you distribute them as separate works. Is your plugin a "reasonably independent and separate work"? The "libfreeradius-radius" library is LGPL'd. Any program depending on that needs to follow that license. FreeRADIUS (the core and modules) are GPL'd, though. Any code that depends on the GPL'd portion of the server must follow that license. If your module calls GPL'd functions in FreeRADIUS, then it would be clear that it should follow the terms of the GPL. Alan DeKok.
Thanks Alan for your answer. Although I'm not very happy with it ... This means I need to put more work on the program.
If your module calls GPL'd functions in FreeRADIUS, then it would be clear that it should follow the terms of the GPL.
I am calling cf_section_parse, rad_malloc, rad_log, pair_find, pair_add and so on... So I guess I am subject to the GPL, even if 99% of the code is mine ;-). Greetings 2008/7/11 Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>:
Steven Van Ingelgem wrote:
How does the GPL apply to the freeradius plugins? I want to create a freeradius plugin (completely my code), but does the GPL apply to it? I ask because dynamic linking is a very gray area in the GPL field.
I don't see why.
(2) b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License. ... These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those sections when you distribute them as separate works.
Is your plugin a "reasonably independent and separate work"?
The "libfreeradius-radius" library is LGPL'd. Any program depending on that needs to follow that license. FreeRADIUS (the core and modules) are GPL'd, though. Any code that depends on the GPL'd portion of the server must follow that license.
If your module calls GPL'd functions in FreeRADIUS, then it would be clear that it should follow the terms of the GPL.
Alan DeKok. - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
Steven Van Ingelgem wrote:
Thanks Alan for your answer. Although I'm not very happy with it ... This means I need to put more work on the program.
Since you're leverage nearly 10 years of FreeRADIUS development, the balance is clearly in your favor.
I am calling cf_section_parse, rad_malloc, rad_log, pair_find, pair_add and so on... So I guess I am subject to the GPL, even if 99% of the code is mine ;-).
Feel free to re-write the rest of the server so that the "1%" of the code that isn't yours falls under a proprietary license. Alan DeKok.
Steven Van Ingelgem wrote:
Thanks Alan for your answer. Although I'm not very happy with it ...
So I guess I am subject to the GPL, even if 99% of the code is mine ;-). That is a remarkably bad attitude which will find little sympathy from open source developers. It never ceases to amaze me how some people want to abuse the open source model when they are direct beneficiaries of it.
-- John Dennis <jdennis@redhat.com>
participants (3)
-
Alan DeKok -
John Dennis -
Steven Van Ingelgem