Why LGPL?

[CharlesMcAllister]

I'm having second thoughts over Zeos due to its LGPL license.
I don't want to offend anyone. But to me, it seems Zeos would benefit by using an MPL license instead. It would be less restrictive for use in commercial applications, while still giving credit to the authors.

For instance, i'm already using MPL code from Turbopower, Indy etc., but now by using Zeos, I'd have additional requirements that I haven't thought of before. Like requiring my application use runtime packages, and allowing reverse engineering of my application. These aren't necessarily show-stoppers for me, but it may be enough to scare a lot of people off Zeos.

I say MPL could benefit Zeos, because more people using Zeos in commercial applications could mean that Zeos gets more attention.

I've heard that the original authors have left the Zeos project. Is this true?
Can we contact them about this issue?
Thanks for consideration!

[mdaems]

Hi Charles,

I'm not a legal expert and I don't know which version of our copyright statement you read.
Since beta release we have changed all copyright formulas in the coding to this:

{********************************************************}
{ Copyright (c) 1999-2006 Zeos Development Group }
{ }
{ License Agreement: }
{ }
{ This library is distributed in the hope that it will be }
{ useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the }
{ implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR }
{ A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU Lesser General }
{ Public License for more details. }
{ }
{ The source code of the ZEOS Libraries and packages are }
{ distributed under the Library GNU General Public }
{ License (see the file COPYING / COPYING.ZEOS) }
{ with the following modification: }
{ As a special exception, the copyright holders of this }
{ library give you permission to link this library with }
{ independent modules to produce an executable, }
{ regardless of the license terms of these independent }
{ modules, and to copy and distribute the resulting }
{ executable under terms of your choice, provided that }
{ you also meet, for each linked independent module, }
{ the terms and conditions of the license of that module. }
{ An independent module is a module which is not derived }
{ from or based on this library. If you modify this }
{ library, you may extend this exception to your version }
{ of the library, but you are not obligated to do so. }
{ If you do not wish to do so, delete this exception }
{ statement from your version. }
{ }
{ }
{ The project web site is located on: }
{ http://zeos.firmos.at (FORUM) }
{ http://zeosbugs.firmos.at (BUGTRACKER) }
{ svn://zeos.firmos.at/zeos/trunk (SVN Repository) }
{ }
{ http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/zeoslib. }
{ http://www.zeoslib.sourceforge.net }
{ }
{ }
{ }
{ Zeos Development Group. }
{********************************************************}

As I understand it you can use ZEOSLIB independent of your own licence, without runtime packages and the other stuff.
Am I wrong?
Beware however : distributing the database dll's is not included in this rule. There the rules of the database developpers apply!! (eg distributing mysql dll in closed source apps requires a mysql oem licence)

Mark

[CharlesMcAllister]

I think the Zeos license is called LGPL with linking exception...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPL_linking_exception

After doing some more research on LGPL, I see now the advantages that LGPL provides the Zeos project -- the ability to GPL the library at any time, while still being friendly for proprietary, commercial applications.

But I still have to get by this term of the license:
"6. As an exception to the Sections above, you may also combine or link a "work that uses the Library" with the Library to produce a work containing portions of the Library, and distribute that work under terms of your choice, provided that the terms permit modification of the work for the customer's own use and reverse engineering for debugging such modifications." [emphasis mine]

I think our license is fairly boiler-plate and doesnt allow decompiling or reverse engineering. Although we could make a concession for modifying the application for the purpose of updating the Zeos runtime or any other 3rd party runtime, I read the LGPL as saying the application, "the work", can be modified for whatever purpose the end user sees fit.

Its just something we as a company have to come to terms with before committing to using Zeos.

[firmos]

Hi, Charles !

we made the "linking exception" changes for the following reasons

*) to allow statically linked programs (much use for freepascal / lazarus)
to be distributed under a commercial licence
*) to be fully compatible with the Freepascal Library Licence
*) to attract more "commerial" users

We ("firmos") are using Zeos extensively for commercial apps too.

ZEOS is a great product - but currently we have only a few
"main" developers.

My firm and I am spending some time to the project, some bugfixing - some new features, and i am responsible for the technical site, we provide the svn repositories and the hosting.

Mark is currently the most active developer.

We sadly have much more users than contributors ....

This is not a big problem IMHO as ZEOS is very stable.
We use it in a 7/24 BILLING application on Linux with freepascal.

Currently the main problems are
* new Documentation
* slow Progress of new features
* slow Progress of Bugfixing

We are currently working on

* prepared Statements for MySQL and PostgreSQL

I hope this helps you a bit in your evaluation.

greets,

helmut