[Qgis-developer] Directions needed for GSOC Proposal
tech_dev at wildintellect.com
Mon Mar 26 15:40:39 EDT 2012
SEXTANTE just needs to be a GPL compatible license, it does not need to
be GPL itself, though the copy distributed with QGIS will be treated as
GPL. (In effect it ends up being like a dual license).
See the diagram on http://www.gnu.org/licenses/quick-guide-gplv3.html
I would recommend LGPL otherwise people writing the SEXTANTE plugin for
Arc might run into trouble. This would provide flexibility in what
applications can use the library (much the way gdal/ogr shows up
This is quite different than the other issue being discussed which is
the import of Arc into a QGIS plugin. To be clear yes people can do such
things, and could import proprietary applications into their plugins,
they just can't legally distribute it outside their company.
On 03/26/2012 05:26 AM, G. Allegri wrote:
> I would keep it LGPL. I'm not interested in wrapping it in proprietary
> code, but to use proprietary code through SEXTANTE...
> 2012/3/26 Peter Borissow <peter.borissow at yahoo.com>
>> Do you need to GPL all of SETANTE or just the glueware (e.g. QGIS plugin)?
>> In otherwords, is there a way to keep the SEXTANTE core MIT or LGPL?
>> *From:* Victor Olaya <volayaf at gmail.com>
>> *To:* cavallini at faunalia.it
>> *Cc:* qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
>> *Sent:* Monday, March 26, 2012 6:10 AM
>> *Subject:* Re: [Qgis-developer] Directions needed for GSOC Proposal
>> Then, I guess there is no discussion. As I said, in this case there is
>> no difference from my point of view, so GPL is a good option for
More information about the Qgis-developer