[vox-tech] XFree86 4.4.0 non-GPL compatible

[Ken Bloom]

--x+6KMIRAuhnl3hBn
Content-Type: text/plain; Format=Flowed; DelSp=Yes; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On 2004.02.29 21:19, Mike Simons wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 29, 2004 at 07:35:23PM -0800, Ken Bloom wrote:
> > On 2004.02.29 18:32, Mike Simons wrote:
> > >On Fri, Feb 27, 2004 at 07:18:38PM -0800, Jim Lowman wrote:
> > >Xfree86 4.4.0 does have support for the Radeon 9800 video card...
> > >however it seems that XFree86 recently (Jan 29) decided to change the
> > >license on the X server to be GPL incompatible.  Depending on how
> > >the various distributions deal with with this it may take a while for
> > >that card to work in most distros.
> > >
> > >http://xfree86.org/legal/licenses.html
> > >=3D=3D=3D
> > >What about GPL-compatibility?
> > >
> > >The 1.1 license is not GPL-compatible. To avoid new issues with
> > >application programs that may be licensed under the GPL, the 1.1
> licence
> > >is not being applied to client side libraries.
> > >=3D=3D=3D
> >
> > How exactly does GPL incompatibility cause a problem for the distros?
>=20
> Well the old license was GPL compatible.
>=20
> If there are any parts of the distribution that the non-GPL X server
> portions
> run time link with GPL'd code then distributions would not be able to
> continue
> shipping both the new X server and that GPL'd thing.  They could chose
> one other the other but not both.
>=20
> People are upset about this, and a fork of the XFree86 code is =20
> possible...
>=20
> which will delay progress.
>=20
> If you search on google for "xfree86 gpl license change" you should get
> plenty of material to read.
>=20
> http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/gpl-compatible.html
> =3D=3D=3D
> There's also some recent evidence that GPL compatibility is important
> from one project that's tried to go from GPL-compatible to
> GPL-incompatible: XFree86. The XFree86 project has historically led
> development of a popular X server, and traditionally the vast majority
> of its code used the simple "MIT/X" open source license that is
> GPL-compatible. The XFree86 president, David Dawes, decided to change
> the XFree86 license to one that isn't GPL-compatible, primarily to give
> developers more credit. This proposed license change caused a serious
> uproar. Jim Gettys, a well-respected developer, strongly opposed this
> change to the XFree86 license, even though he's not a strong advocate of
> the GPL. Richard Stallman asked that something be worked out. An article
> at Linux Today and a discussion at Freedesktop.org show that Red Hat,
> Debian, SuSE, Gentoo, Mandrake, and OpenBSD plan to drop XFree86 if they
> switch to this new license. [...]
> At this point it's not clear what will happen, but I think it's very
> likely that the license will change (again) or the project will be forked
> (with most users switching to the fork).
> =3D=3D=3D

I think I'm beginning to understand now by reading the GPL FAQ what all =20
this means. Apparently the GPL is designed to save your code and allow it =
=20
to be used in development only for other free-software reasons. So they =20
want to disallow a non-free program from linking to your GPL library. Now =
=20
as best I can figure out from the GPL FAQ, a link is a two-way street. If =
=20
you design your code to link to a library, then that library is linking to =
=20
you as well, and that violates the GPL. (Apparently the Microsoft runtime =
=20
libraries are a bit of an exception because this is the expected use - =20
however, the X libraries wouldn't be.)

Am I understanding this correctly? I doubt I can be because it makes no =20
sense for the FSF to remove so much of their own flexibility.

If this were the case, could we still include XFree 4.4 in a distribution =
=20
but use somebody else's (freedesktop.org) client-side X libraries? (These =
=20
talk to the X-server only over the network)

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

As for forks, I'm not sure what else is out there right now, but I have =20
heard about Xouvert - this fork started semi-recently, because the =20
developer that started it was fed up with the political difficulty of =20
making contributions to XFree. I checked their website (www.xouvert.org), =
=20
and they're targeting an April 1 release.

That said, their email list and their IRC channel don't look all that =20
active, so I don't know what will become of it.

Didn't freedesktop.org also have an X-server, maybe even a fork of XFree?

--=20
I usually have a GPG digital signature included as an attachment.
See http://www.gnupg.org/ for info about these digital signatures.
My key was last signed 10/14/2003. If you use GPG *please* see me about
signing the key. ***** My computer can't give you viruses by email. ***

--x+6KMIRAuhnl3hBn
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBAQtRDlHapveKyytERAsckAJ9v4ZdcmocUIrYcr4sp+UuX4m8fxwCcC91o
XsJcXntnM1RgrfpOyFY4eDk=
=jxrI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--x+6KMIRAuhnl3hBn--