License issue: Seems it is risky to use rsyslog which has multiple licenses (ex. GPL3+, LGPL3+, Apache 2.0 or open Solaris/CDDL)

[krtaylor]

On 6/12/18 2:11 AM, Wang, Kuiying wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> According to the description, rsyslog “NOT license under a commercial 
> license” and has multiple licenses (ex. GPL3+, LGPL3+, Apache 2.0 or 
> open Solaris/CDDL), there is a big risk for OpenBMC to use rsyslog 
> project right?
>
> Does community aware of this?
>
> https://github.com/rsyslog/rsyslog
>
> /Rsyslog's main sponsor Adiscon tries to fund rsyslog by selling 
> custom development and support contracts. /
>
> /Adiscon does NOT license rsyslog under a commercial license (this is 
> simply impossible for anyone due to rsyslog's license structure)./
>
First off, I am not a lawyer. But, this statement simply means that they 
do not want to sell you a license, not that it is impossible.

Many open source projects are licensed under multiple licenses. It is up 
to the company building a product on an open source project to access 
whether or not the terms are acceptable for them. That said, when 
selecting one project to use over another, license definitely should be 
a factor in the decision process.
>
> //
>
> syslog-ng project should be much more friendly than rsyslog on license.
>
> https://github.com/balabit/syslog-ng/
>
This project is also licensed under multiple licenses: GPL and LGPL.

Kurt Taylor (krtaylor)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/openbmc/attachments/20180613/f6ff47fd/attachment.html>