Thank you for your feedback on the license change. We are in the process of evaluating the licensing incompatibilities introduced by the re-licensing to AGPLv3 and looking at the different alternatives. It would be very useful to have a better understanding of the different projects that use BDB and what 'flavor' of BDB they use. BDB is available as Data Store (DS), Concurrent Data Store (CDS), Transactional Data Store (TDS), and High Availability (HA). Maybe we can use this thread to start to collect such information.
Speaking about Fedora projects very generally after quick look-up it seems that all modes are used quite a lot, except HA. IIUIC, projects sometimes use CDS and TDS only as a better alternative or in the opposite way, DS is used if CDS/TDS are not available. These are some quick look-up results without any guarantee:
thank you very much for the feedback. I want to leave this thread open a bit to see what else comes in.
I am Jesús Cea, maintainer of the Python Berkeley DB bindings.
The bindings are licensed as BSD 3-clauses, so my code is incompatible with BDB 6.0. No Python program, under any license, can use BDB 6.0, then. I can't change the license because it is inherited code and it is impossible to contact with every past author.
I plan to do a release that ONLY allow linking with BDB 6.0 IF you define a environment variable saying "yes, I have a Oracle commercial license for this". Ugly and hacky, but hopefully safe for everybody.
Personaly I use Berkeley DB HA and two phases commit A LOT in my internal projects. It is my main mode, in fact. I use it for everything, from mail storage to application deployment.