RFC: Drop GoAHead / cpukit/httpd webserver?

Joel Sherrill joel.sherrill at OARcorp.com
Wed Nov 18 13:30:58 UTC 2009

Eric Valette wrote:
> On 18/11/2009 13:20, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>> This software is pure GPL and we have not included pure GPL licensed 
>> code in RTEMS
>> because we statically link with proprietary user code and we do not 
>> want the GPL
>> to automatically apply to end users.
> I *know* joel. That is why I stated that appweb license was also 
> problematic in my first mail...
:-D  I am obligated to yelp every time someone mentions putting pure GPL 
in RTEMS.  We are "guardians" of what RTEMS application license 
obligates end
users to do and right now the answer is nothing. 
>> Submitters to appweb apparently have to sign a submittal agreement.
>> http://www.appwebserver.org/developers/contributorsAgreement.html
> Yes. But this also hold for code included in classical GNU project or 
> when you want to transfer copyright. I remember having to sign a 
> document to transfer code to GDB at some point in time. If the 
> maintainer was not doing this he would not have the right to sell the 
> new code without all copyright owner agreement.
I have signed multiple FSF assignments myself and doing it for a
true non-profit is one thing.   I see no compelling reason to help
them with their business model at the expense of making RTEMS
applications GPL. :-D
>> FWIW GoAhead was not GPL.
> Honestly I do not remember. But I do remember we indeed clarified the 
> licensing issues.
It was a BSD/MIT type license that required you to put the GoAhead logo 
visible unless you arranged otherwise.  Showing the webserver logo on a 
webpage somewhere
seemed like a mild requirement.  Not great but not onerous.

> -- eric

More information about the users mailing list