[Zlib-devel] zlib and LZMA

[Alexander Mai]

Mark Brown wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 16, 2006 at 04:37:27PM -0700, Mark Adler wrote:
>
>   
>> I think the proposed restriction is acceptable.  What do the rest of  
>> you think?
>>     
>
> One possible issue with a restriction would be if it were to introduce
> an incompatibility with software licensed under the GPL.  zlib is fairly
> widely used by software written under the GPL and since the GPL has a
> "no additional restrictions" clause it tends to cause problems when used
> in conjunction with libraries that have restrictions in their licenses.
>
> I'm not clear if this is actually an issue or not: the snippet you
> posted earlier seems to suggest that the code is multiply licensed and
> that one of the options is the LGPL which is GPL compatible and so
> avoids that problem.
>
> Would it be possible for you to post the full license text as it stands?
> That might make it easier to comment on it.
>
>   
Well, I think there are two approaches:
for the experienced people dealing with license issues more often (than
me...) full text
is helpful. For the others we may have to start collecting a FAQ ("How
do I...", "What happens if ...")

Another candidate for the FAQ:
what is the correct action for me after I find a bug in the zlib and I
have to
ship a binary immediately?
The product does not ship with any kind of source code, so attaching the
diff
is not an option. The fix may take a while until it can be submitted
here because
maybe it needs to be cleaned up (remove #ifdef
ALEXANDER_TRIES_TO_FIX_A_CRASH sections ;-)
or I'm heading for vacation just after shipping.
Am I already running into legal problems in this case?

The code/license may not really cause _real_ (read "hard  or impossible
to resolve") problems
but for sure it's going to confuse people. Like me...

Alexander

P.S. What's zlib-devel at madler.net? I'm used to zlib-devel at zlib.net?!