[pLog-svn] [Discussion] About the sub-license/re-license to plogplugins

[Matt]

Mark Wu wrote:
> I suppose I can re-license  or sub-license my plugins in beginning. But
> after read this
> http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLAndPlugins , I just
> confused. That's why I ask.
> 
> Accodring to the FAQ, I can not re-license/sub-license my plugin, if my
> plugin can not "execute" alone .... Weird. It is really different as my
> original understanding.

>From FSF...
<copy>
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.
</copy>

These questions/answers were defined for C style programs. In essence
our plugins can act as totally separate entities (ie the gallery2
plugin) and all pLog does is load the classes.

pLog invokes the constructor and maybe soon the ::install() function...
but thats it... everything else is added by the user.

My understanding is such that because these plugins are added manually
by the user (or at least non-official ones are) and the user modified
templates etc to use the plugins. There is no reason why the plugins
could not be under a different license.

For example the mysql-php debacle. php uses the MySQL api, php is under
the PHP License which is a derivative of the GPL while MySQL API is
under mysql's liscense.

We are just pLog under GPL, plugin under anything... as long as the
client adds the plugins dynamically by hisself/herself.

This is just my interpretation... I'm no lawyer ;)

-- 
Matt (matt\ at\ woodzy.com)       Public Key: woodzy.com/woodzy.gpg.asc