Ah, Tim, it's getting clear. Thanks.<div>The key point is distribution, as always with GPL.</div><div>In my case I won't distribute the ESRI geoprocessing libraries, they're part of the ArcGIS distribution, which is only availbale to users having it installed on they're computers.</div>
<div><br></div><div>The import satement will success only if the user have the ArcGIS product installed, otherwise it will fail. As a consequence I felt I could freely distribute my plugin as it doesn't strictly require the proprietary side to run.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Doesn't GDAL do the same with ECW?! Ok GDAL are LGPL. Is this the key difference?</div><div><br></div><div>Moreover it doesn't expose the QGis APIs to ArcGIS, and viceversa, so it only bridges the two world to interchange the data.</div>
<div><br></div><div>giovanni</div><div><br></div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote">2012/3/26 Tim Sutton <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:lists@linfiniti.com">lists@linfiniti.com</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Hi<br>
<br>
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 4:52 PM, G. Allegri <<a href="mailto:giohappy@gmail.com">giohappy@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> Through the various considerations on this topic there are two positions the<br>
> seems contradictory to me:<br>
><br>
> "I did some research on this, and the conclusion is that import is<br>
> functionally and legally equivalent to linking during compilation, so<br>
> everything that imports qgis must be GPL." [1]<br>
><br>
<br>
So if you plan to distribute although technically possible to link to<br>
a proprietary module, its not legall possible.<br>
<br>
> then<br>
><br>
> "you can import/link proprietary code into gpl code, provided you have a<br>
> license to do it."<br>
><br>
<br>
So if you have the license to ESRI etc. to use their libraries you are<br>
welcome to make yourself a QGIS frontend to ArcSomething, but you cant<br>
legally distribute that.<br>
<br>
> They probably mean different things and they're not in contradiction. Being<br>
> an important point to me, could you help in understanding it?<br>
><br>
<br>
Above is my understanding of those points anyway....<br>
<br>
Regards<br>
<br>
Tim<br>
<br>
> thanks a lot,<br>
> Giovanni<br>
><br>
><br>
> [1] <a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/2012-March/018976.html" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/2012-March/018976.html</a><br>
> [2] <a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/2012-March/019000.html" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/2012-March/019000.html</a><br>
><br>
> 2012/3/26 G. Allegri <<a href="mailto:giohappy@gmail.com">giohappy@gmail.com</a>><br>
><br>
>> I think you're right but watch the reality from a worldwide point of view.<br>
>> I work mostly with foreign countries, not EU/USA. National offices and<br>
>> agencies budgets are far beyond the license fees, so they don't care for it<br>
>> very much. They pay yearly for something that already do the work they need,<br>
>> without having to do contracts for development, define requirements, etc.<br>
>> This is the reality. In my courses, even those based on ESRI software, I<br>
>> always introduce FOSS solutions. Sometimes it raises interest, most of times<br>
>> they don't care. They want the job done, and they don't pay for the license.<br>
>> That's it.<br>
>><br>
>> Anyway, if I wouldn't think that (most) of times a free solution could be<br>
>> the best way, I wouldn't be here to talk about it ;)<br>
>><br>
>> giovanni<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> 2012/3/26 Sandro Santilli <<a href="mailto:strk@keybit.net">strk@keybit.net</a>><br>
>>><br>
>>> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 03:31:53PM +0200, G. Allegri wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>> > I totally agree with you, but reality is a bit different. Many<br>
>>> > agencies,<br>
>>> > corporates, etc. are not considering to leave they're infrastructure.<br>
>>><br>
>>> It's their choice, they'll have to bear the consequences of that.<br>
>>><br>
>>> > I suggest solutions to interoperate, not to switch the whole thing.<br>
>>><br>
>>> What I'm saying is that it just costs more. And rightly so.<br>
>>> It is no interest of the free software users to make it any cheaper,<br>
>>> IMHO.<br>
>>><br>
>>> > It would be easier, and a lot cheeper, if everybody talked one<br>
>>> > language.<br>
>>><br>
>>> +1<br>
>>><br>
>>> > But we have hundreads of languages in the world, and we have to deal<br>
>>> > with<br>
>>> > this.<br>
>>><br>
>>> People grow up learning the language of their mothers.<br>
>>> Nobody has to pay a license to _use_ that language.<br>
>>> And anyone can learn.<br>
>>> We're really not talking about the same thing.<br>
>>><br>
>>> --strk;<br>
>><br>
>><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Qgis-developer mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org">Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer</a><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
Tim Sutton - QGIS Project Steering Committee Member (Release Manager)<br>
==============================================<br>
Please do not email me off-list with technical<br>
support questions. Using the lists will gain<br>
more exposure for your issues and the knowledge<br>
surrounding your issue will be shared with all.<br>
<br>
Visit <a href="http://linfiniti.com" target="_blank">http://linfiniti.com</a> to find out about:<br>
* QGIS programming and support services<br>
* Mapserver and PostGIS based hosting plans<br>
* FOSS Consulting Services<br>
Skype: timlinux<br>
Irc: timlinux on #qgis at <a href="http://freenode.net" target="_blank">freenode.net</a><br>
==============================================<br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>