Re: Using the invoice system - government rules

["John R. Hogerhuis" <..hidden..>]

On 10/30/07, Chris Travers <..hidden..> wrote:
> On 10/30/07, John R. Hogerhuis <..hidden..> wrote:
> If we add a modular API to do this, one could essentially write
> connectors to optionally store the data anywhere (kt, or wherever).
>

That makes a lot of sense.

> Adding a dependency to a GPL v3 project would complicate license
> issues.  In particular I am not clear how GPL v3 section 7, paragraph
> 2 could be applied to BSD-licensed code* in some of our other
> dependencies, so I don't know if it is a good idea for the project to
> become tied to KT.

I guess that question hinges on whether using a GPL v3 web service
from GPL2 code triggers the linking provisions of GPL 2, since the
access would be over the network via SOAP. I don't know the answer to
that off the top of my head.

>
> * This paragraph covers "relicensing" of portions of the covered work,
> basically requiring the ability to change the license on any of our
> depencies to the base GPL v3 + 7(3) additional terms without asserting
> any copyrights of ones own.  This would be applicable to PostgreSQL if
> and only if we could distribute PostgreSQL

I'm confused about the PostgreSQL licensing angle. Why relicensing?
Are you saying that the incompatibility you are concerned about re: KT
is incompatibility of PostgreSQL with GPL 3?

> Finally, I think it is a bad idea for a community-developed project to
> be dependent on a single-vendor product for certain sorts of
> functionality.
>

Yep. I agree it would need to be abstracted in some way plugin or
whatnot, and you would need to provide some simple storage of
documents whether KT is there or not.

-- John.