GPL license

[Maurizio Cimadamore]

Hi,
jextract being GPLv2 just follows what the rest of OpenJDK is doing.

I'd like to understand better what your use case is before commenting 
further: are you worried jextract will generate GPLv2 code? Because that 
is NOT the case. While the template files are marked as GPLv2 (as they 
are checked into the repository), what comes out of jextract does not 
have any license header (or at least, that's the spirit, if you are 
experiencing otherwise, I'd say that's a bug).

Does that address your concern?

Regards
Maurizio


On 20/03/2023 02:11, Shane Pearlman wrote:
> What’s the reasoning for licensing a tool like this under the GPLv2?
>
> Code generators often need to be modified or adapted for large 
> bindings projects, and the classes in org.openjdk.jextract.impl and 
>  org.openjdk.jextract.clang could be quite useful as a starting point. 
>  Under the current license, however, I will probably have to roll my own.
>
> Even the code generation template classes are under GPLv2, which is 
> enough to prevent me from using jextract generated bindings in my 
> non-GPL projects. Maybe someone’s reading of the license is that it is 
> permissible, but is the uncertainty really necessary?
>
> That said, I am excited for the Panama project to deliver what looks 
> to be a very well designed solution to a major, decade-long problem 
> with Java.
>
> —Shane
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jextract-dev/attachments/20230320/9ecfab66/attachment.htm>