4 ms·

> (Otherwise, for instance, all software written in Java would be subject to Java's license agreement.) Java is licensed under GPL.

by maxloh 4y ago

mdaniel 4y ago
GPLv2 specifically https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/jdk-21%2B9/LICENSE#L3 https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/jdk-21%2B9/LICENSE#L3 although Java is the most famous software I know of with the "CLASSPATH exception" https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/jdk-21%2B9/LICENSE#L326 https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/jdk-21%2B9/LICENSE#L326 to avoid "linking" the user's compiled artifacts with Oracle's compiled artifacts. I believe there are other projects that make use of that exception, but I couldn't readily find them
- throwaway2037 4y ago
  I think the history of this exception comes from the Apache Harmony project which was an early, incomplete fully open source implementation of Java core libraries. As I recall, IBM was heavily involved in this project. (Or was it GNU Classpath? I forget.) And, please remember that Sun Microsystems open-sourced JDK with great difficulty! (There was a mess of proprietary licenses deep within the core library for years that needed to be dug out one by one.) Some very smart lawyers probably thought long and hard about that linking exception. I doubt Oracle likes it, but it is probably impossible to change now.
teraflop 4y ago
The point I'm trying to make with that sentence doesn't depend on the exact license. I apologize if I didn't word it clearly enough. Java is licensed under the GPL, which says any derivative works of a GPL'd work must also be GPL-licensed. But merely using the Java APIs doesn't make your program a derivative work of Java, which is why it's possible to write and distribute non-GPL software in Java. By the same reasoning, a client library that merely uses Vaultwarden's APIs does not automatically become bound to the terms of Vaultwarden's copyright license. The AGPL states quite clearly, for the avoidance of doubt, that the only acts it restricts are things that would otherwise require the copyright holder's permission.

> (Otherwise, for instance, all software written in Java would be subject to Java's license agreement.) Java is licensed under GPL.

by maxloh 4y ago

> (Otherwise, for instance, all software written in Java would be subject to Java's license agreement.) Java is licensed under GPL.

mdaniel 4y ago

GPLv2 specifically https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/jdk-21%2B9/LICENSE#L3 https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/jdk-21%2B9/LICENSE#L3 although Java is the most famous software I know of with the "CLASSPATH exception" https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/jdk-21%2B9/LICENSE#L326 https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/jdk-21%2B9/LICENSE#L326 to avoid "linking" the user's compiled artifacts with Oracle's compiled artifacts. I believe there are other projects that make use of that exception, but I couldn't readily find them

throwaway2037 4y ago
I think the history of this exception comes from the Apache Harmony project which was an early, incomplete fully open source implementation of Java core libraries. As I recall, IBM was heavily involved in this project. (Or was it GNU Classpath? I forget.) And, please remember that Sun Microsystems open-sourced JDK with great difficulty! (There was a mess of proprietary licenses deep within the core library for years that needed to be dug out one by one.) Some very smart lawyers probably thought long and hard about that linking exception. I doubt Oracle likes it, but it is probably impossible to change now.

teraflop 4y ago

The point I'm trying to make with that sentence doesn't depend on the exact license. I apologize if I didn't word it clearly enough. Java is licensed under the GPL, which says any derivative works of a GPL'd work must also be GPL-licensed. But merely using the Java APIs doesn't make your program a derivative work of Java, which is why it's possible to write and distribute non-GPL software in Java. By the same reasoning, a client library that merely uses Vaultwarden's APIs does not automatically become bound to the terms of Vaultwarden's copyright license. The AGPL states quite clearly, for the avoidance of doubt, that the only acts it restricts are things that would otherwise require the copyright holder's permission.