strbuf & other stuff dual-licensing, was Re: GSoC 2010

> On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 10:32:44AM +0100, Sverre Rabbelier wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 10:35, Johannes Schindelin
> > <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
> > > On Fri, 12 Feb 2010, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > >> It is already mentioned on the wiki that this would probably be a
> > >> problem, license-wise. (the svn library is Apache license, which is
> > >> incompatible with GPLv2)
> > 
> > Yeah, guess who put that there ;).
> > 
> > > So git-remote-svn would have to be under an Apache-compatible license, so
> > > what? It is not as if git-remote-svn was a derivative work of Git, just
> > > because it abides by a very simple command-line interface that happens to
> > > be defined in Git, but would work anywhere else, too.
> > 
> > Excellent point, I think we could safely argue that if we only expose
> > 'import' and 'export' (so adhere to the fast-import/fast-export format
> > that is already widely used), that it is indeed not a derative work.
> 
> It is not so clear when you begin to use facilities such as strbuf, etc.
> Maybe dual-licensing these parts would be enough, though, but that still
> means doing some homework (getting approval from all contributors)