D/BUS IDL compiler ...

Michael Meeks michael@ximian.com
Wed, 10 Mar 2004 11:03:02 +0000

Hi Carlos,

On Mon, 2004-03-08 at 09:33 +0200, Carlos.Guerreiro@nokia.com wrote:
> Looks like Meeks is working on the IDL already ;)

	;-) although not so hard. Ultimately, I'm persuaded we have to have IDL
as the authoritative, standard contract definitions, rather than parsing
C headers (and/or perl,python,-whatever language the service is
implemented in- to try and extract interface data / documentation from

	Clearly my prototype compiler needs re-factoring though.

> > 	* The license is LGPL/X11 - I'm still deeply concerned with the
> > 	  unresolved AFL legal issue.
> Do you know what is the exact legal issue he's worrying about?

	It's no issue if you use D/BUS under the GPL - although this may incur
problems with embedded systems etc. (AFAIR). My problem (well not mine
really, but...) is with section 10 of the AFL - which (it seems) might
be construed to destroy the usefulness of a defensive patent portfolio -
something vital to any large company. I believe I rambled in an
ill-educated way in the past on the list about this - dig there. I
understand Havoc is investigating / sorting the issue out though.



 michael@ximian.com  <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot