[logback-user] GPL+Classpath exception - correction

Ceki Gulcu listid at qos.ch
Fri May 30 22:28:16 CEST 2008

Anton Tagunov wrote:

Anton> On one account I understand that a commercial company
Anton> can create derived work even from GPL works as long as
Anton> the result is used only for its internal needs
Anton> and distributed. From the aspect I'm okay even with GPL.

Anton> Correction: I meant and NOT distributed.
Anton> This is a typical case for where I work at.

True. I might add that relatively few people know that GPL is
non-viral when the hosting software (using GPLed code) is used only
internally and NOT distributed.

Anton> And this is where my concerns chime in.  I'm really really
Anton> concerned that to beat Log4J SLF4J/Logback need to beat it
Anton> on all fronts. Including the license.

Anton> That was the essence of my opinion: SLF4J/Logback are great and
Anton> deserve to win.  In order to win they need to win the hearts of Big
Anton> Co-s to.  And to do so they need MIT/ASL.

The various open-source licenses have their pros and cons. I agree
with you that LGPL might hinder adoption within the ASF and beyond.
As a counter-example, one could mention Hibernate which totally
dominates the ORM market. More to the point, Java 7 is distributed
under GPL+"classpath exception". When it is officially released and
users start to adopt it in very large numbers, then whatever
opposition against GPL/LGPL is likely to wither away.

As for loggback's license, we have no irrepressible urge to dominate
the "world of logging". If we do, that would be cool, if we don't, we

Nevertheless, your arguments make sense, and logback's license
may be changed depending on how the future unfolds.

More information about the Logback-user mailing list