SN backend GPL or LGPL? (was: SourceNav release...)
Wed Feb 13 09:06:00 GMT 2002
If we did have the back end torn off of SN, would that make everything
that used also GPL?
Can we take SN type GPL code, turn it into a library, and then use it in
an LGPL way?
What if we had some sort of Corba type middle ware that provided a
decent distributed API, without actually linking the code in. Would any
application that connected to it still be bound by the GPL?
I am trying to find out here if there is any room for commercial
developers to contribute to SN. It would be a shame to let it all go to
> From: Mo DeJong <supermo at bayarea dot net>
> To: "Eray Ozkural (exa)" <erayo at cs dot bilkent dot edu dot tr>
> Cc: sourcenav at sources dot redhat dot com
> Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 09:45:27 -0800
> Subject: Re: SourceNav release ...
> I think the right solution is to turn the SN backend into a
> library. Even if you don't reuse the code, the ideas that are
> there have years of effort behind them and they do work. It should
> make use of Berkeley DB to store symbols but through an API so
> that people can swap out other database layers if they want to. It
> should also provide a nice two phase parse and dump into symbol DB
> sequence that is easily inspected. Just figuring out what and
> where the problem with a parser is can be the most difficult part
> of fixing a problem. Also, it is absolutely critical that a well
> defined regression test framework is developed as part of the
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 366 bytes
Desc: Card for Robert Hartley
More information about the Sourcenav