TLS for iOS - how to proceed

Joakim dlang at
Wed Apr 2 01:26:18 PDT 2014

Again, nice work.  Do all the unit tests pass now?  If so, you 
should mention this on D.announce after you get the code up 
somewhere, as I'm sure others would like to play with it, :) and 
not everyone follows this newsgroup.

On Wednesday, 2 April 2014 at 07:35:20 UTC, Dan Olson wrote:
> My quick read of the 
> makes me
> think compliance would be by documenting any modification from 
> original,
> keeping the license intact in source, and a prominent notice by
> executable only versions of the license and how to view the 
> modified
> source. Not sure how that applies to a library.

I reread the APSL and yeah, you pretty much got it right.  It 
applies for any binary, doesn't matter if it's a library or not.  
The APSL requires that you provide source for the files or 
modifications you took from them, but it doesn't care if you 
compile those files with other source files that are licensed 
differently, unlike the GPL but similar to the CDDL.  So there's 
no real problem with combining it with boost libraries like 
druntime, ie the license is compatible and not viral, but it does 
pose an additional requirement that anyone using it has to post a 
notice making the APS-licensed source available.

> That might be a good idea. Keeps licensing issues, if any, away 
> from
> druntime or LDC. As a separate lib, it can just be added to the 
> link
> command as needed. And easily removed if Apple turns tlv on for 
> iPhone
> SDK.

Sounds like a good approach.  If anyone cares enough about the 
source restrictions of the APSL, maybe they'll reimplement it as 
boost-licensed source and submit it to druntime someday.

More information about the digitalmars-d-ldc mailing list