[Qgis-developer] Directions needed for GSOC Proposal

[G. Allegri]

Ok, going through hyopthesis things are getting clear. I have answered
Vincent o the other thread:
my plugin is ok until it doesn't load something proprietary in its process
space. As soon as it happens I must be able to provide the source of every
code running in the same process.

giovanni

2012/3/26 G. Allegri <giohappy at gmail.com>

>
>
> 2012/3/26 Alex Mandel <tech_dev at wildintellect.com>
>
>> More specifically here's the compatibility list:
>> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html
>>
>> "MIT" -Expat or X11, most BSD, Apache 2, LGPL are all on the ok list.
>>
>> ^^^ This does not apply to plugins of QGIS which as a technical
>> necessity must import QGIS. It does apply to libraries that QGIS wishes
>> to include and import into QGIS.
>>
>
> Exactly, indeed my plugin will be GPL, and will be distributed as it is.
> How could someone argue that it's illegal? I don't ditribute non-GPL code
> with it...
>
> giovanni
>
>
>>
>> Enjoy,
>> Alex
>>
>> On 03/26/2012 12:40 PM, Alex Mandel wrote:
>> > 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
>> > everywhere).
>> >
>> > 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.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Alex
>> >
>> > 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...
>> >>
>> >> giovanni
>> >>
>> >> 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
>> >>> SEXTANTE
>> >>>
>> >>> Regards
>> >>>
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Qgis-developer mailing list
>> > Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
>> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Qgis-developer mailing list
>> Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20120326/7ecf8a9b/attachment.html