ODBC component licenses

[Jonathan M Davis]

On Thursday, November 10, 2011 10:29 Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 13:10:26 -0500, Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg at gmx.com>
> 
> wrote:
> > On Thursday, November 10, 2011 05:23 Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> >> On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 00:55:01 -0500, Steve Teale
> >> 
> >> <steve.teale at britseyeview.com> wrote:
> >> > The libraries for unixODBC and for FreeTDS (communication with SQL
> >> > Server) are LGPL.
> >> > 
> >> > Would a D ODBC driver that used these be compatible with Phobos?
> >> 
> >> glibc, which dmd (and all Linux binaries) rely on is LGPL. So if you are
> >> saying what I think you are saying, yes. As long as the LGPL code is
> >> kept
> >> in a *separate* shared object, it is perfectly legal to link with it
> >> without infecting phobos' license.
> > 
> > Though the fact that it needs to be in a separate shared object does
> > make it
> > problematic to stick in Phobos, since Phobos is just one shared object.
> > So, if
> > he's looking to put it _in_ Phobos, then I don't think that we can do
> > that
> > with the current setup.
> 
> My understanding is that the FreeTDS is its *own* shared object (installed
> separately). We cannot include LGPL code in phobos.lib.

I'm afraid that I've never even heard of TDS, so I'm not quite sure how that 
relates. We theoretically _could_ provide LGPL code in a separate library, but 
we don't do anything like that now.

> BTW, phobos is not a shared object (yet).

LOL. True. I didn't think that statement through enough. It's a library, but 
not a shared one.

- Jonathan M Davis