Plugin Arch. for KDevelope 2.0

[Ralf Nolden]

On Monday, 30. July 2001 12:22, you wrote:
> Am Montag, 30. Juli 2001 11:53 schrieben Sie:
> > The reason I vote for even allowing closed source stuff is that if we
> > want to enforce free licensing it will be very easy to do but on the
> > other hand that means that for example a company like Siemens who wants
> > to add an inhouse-plugin would be required to publish it.
>
> No, even if you use GPL your are not forced to publish the sourcecode of
> your inhouse products. Only if you distribute it.
>
> > If someone wants to make money with a plugin for gideon, well, go ahead
> > I'd say.
>
> Yes, no problem. Open Source doesn't mean you can't make money. Open source
> doesn't mean freeware in the sense of free beer.
>
> >That would also affect the
> > development of closed source/need-to-pay-for applications/plugins for the
> > KDE desktop because an enforcement of opensource kdevelop plugins to the
> > producers of software implicitely would give them the message that they
> > can only deal with KDE by means of opensource/free software. That would
> > be the wrong message I'd say.
> >
> > Sandy, I see the good meaning of your proposal, but the thing is that
> > we're providing our stuff the way we want, what everyone else wants to do
> > should be their freedom. (free in the sense of free to choose, not free
> > beer :))
>
> Ok, I understand your reasons and I can agree with it, but then we must
> change the KDevelop license.:-( IMO it is not possible to write other
> plugins then GPL(maybe BSD) based at the moment. You need to include the
> headers (lib,sourceinfo,keditor,compiler options... ) to write C++ plugins
> and these headers contain sometimes implementation and are GPL. For all
> this we need a special agreement.
Could you bring some light into that if this applies to us:

http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl-faq.html:

If a program released under the GPL uses plug-ins, what are the requirements 
for the licenses of a plug-in.
 It depends on how the program invokes its plug-ins. If the program uses fork 
and exec to invoke plug-ins, then the plug-ins are separate programs, so the 
license for the main program makes no requirements for them. 

If the program dynamically links plug-ins, and they make function calls to 
each other and share data structures, we believe they form a single program, 
so plug-ins must be treated as extensions to the main program. This means 
they must be released under the GPL or a GPL-compatible free software 
license. 

If the program dynamically links plug-ins, but the communication between them 
is limited to invoking the `main' function of the plug-in with some options 
and waiting for it to return, that is a borderline case. 

Ralf




>
> Ciao!
> Sandy
>
> --
> for verifying my signature or send encryted emails:
> ftp://fara.cs.uni-potsdam.de/stud/smeier/public_key
>
>
> -
> to unsubscribe from this list send an email to
> kdevelop-devel-request at kdevelop.org with the following body: unsubscribe
> »your-email-address«

-- 
We're not a company, we just produce better code at less costs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Ralf Nolden
nolden at kde.org

The K Desktop Environment	The KDevelop Project
http://www.kde.org		http://www.kdevelop.org


-
to unsubscribe from this list send an email to kdevelop-devel-request at kdevelop.org with the following body:
unsubscribe »your-email-address«