GPL for DLL's?
-
I guess whatever makes sense for both the end user and the commercial entity. If his answer went along the lines of what Mr Brickley said, I'd be happy with that. Just simply stating that your product would need to be released under the GPL is nuts, that underscores the thinking that the GPL is something like a virus, to protect my company I would have to encrypt my API. Thanks to all for the input, definitely creates some clarity around the issue.
See, that's what YOU would like to say. Someone who works for the 'Free Software Foundation', is probably rubbing his hands with glee at the prospect of someone stealing your livelihood to suit his hippy ideals.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
-
I guess whatever makes sense for both the end user and the commercial entity. If his answer went along the lines of what Mr Brickley said, I'd be happy with that. Just simply stating that your product would need to be released under the GPL is nuts, that underscores the thinking that the GPL is something like a virus, to protect my company I would have to encrypt my API. Thanks to all for the input, definitely creates some clarity around the issue.
RichardBrock wrote:
Just simply stating that your product would need to be released under the GPL is nuts, that underscores the thinking that the GPL is something like a virus, to protect my company I would have to encrypt my API.
That is the difference between a legal reading of the GPL, and the purpose of the FSF. The FSF has a purpose to get all software released free. Therefore, per their purpose, they would, of course, say you must release your product for free. That is just to be expected. They do look at themselves as a virus, slowly spreading through the world until all software is free. Rather a depressing self-image if you ask me, but they are proud of it. :~
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
See, that's what YOU would like to say. Someone who works for the 'Free Software Foundation', is probably rubbing his hands with glee at the prospect of someone stealing your livelihood to suit his hippy ideals.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
"to suit his hippy ideals.", nope : to suit his COMMUNISM ideals ! GPL addicts' favorite claim is : "All your code belongs to us !" If they dared to make the addition GPLed, imagine that every part of code should be now 'open' for their own benefit ! Kochise
In Code we trust !
-
See, that's what YOU would like to say. Someone who works for the 'Free Software Foundation', is probably rubbing his hands with glee at the prospect of someone stealing your livelihood to suit his hippy ideals.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
Christian Graus wrote:
"I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax"
I did that once in college. One of my classmates upstaged me :mad: by slapping a VB6 GUI while I did a direct port of the command line app. Hooray for textbooks with 30 year old code in the appendix. There was the 100liner I ported from Fortran, a 30 pager that I ran with minimal modification (hard coded a half dozen inputs since I had to run if a few hundred times) because the IT dept finally got the fortran compiler working on the computer lab. We never used it, but there was also a basic app written in a dialect so old it contained line numbers. :wtf:
-- CleaKO The sad part about this instance is that none of the users ever said anything [about the problem]. Pete O`Hanlon Doesn't that just tell you everything you need to know about users?
-
Hi, I asked someone at the Free Software Foundation this question, wasn't entirely satisfied with the answer and was really keen to get the input from CP members. Let's say that I develop a commercial product using my own code and I provide an API that allows the end user to develop plugin DLL's for various integration tasks. If the end user develops a plugin that essentially wraps GPL'ed code (maybe he found GPL code that does what he wants it to do), is the entire product now subject to the GPL requirements or simply just the plugin DLL? I would guess that only the plugin needs to be published under the GPL, not the entire product. Your thoughts? Btw the FSF guy said the entire product must be released under the GPL.
The FSF guy is right technically, as I understand things. However there's an issue here: Your product doesn't *require* the plug-in. I believe the GPL makes some issue about this somewhere in the license. Your product doesn't *distribute* the plug-in. You didn't write the plug-in. That's why the LGPL license arose, to work around this kind of idiocy for third party library writers. All in all, this is yet more evidence of how brain dead the GPL is.
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
-
Christian Graus wrote:
"I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax"
I did that once in college. One of my classmates upstaged me :mad: by slapping a VB6 GUI while I did a direct port of the command line app. Hooray for textbooks with 30 year old code in the appendix. There was the 100liner I ported from Fortran, a 30 pager that I ran with minimal modification (hard coded a half dozen inputs since I had to run if a few hundred times) because the IT dept finally got the fortran compiler working on the computer lab. We never used it, but there was also a basic app written in a dialect so old it contained line numbers. :wtf:
-- CleaKO The sad part about this instance is that none of the users ever said anything [about the problem]. Pete O`Hanlon Doesn't that just tell you everything you need to know about users?
I remember on the Apple ][, a program that would renumber your app, so you'd start with 10, 20, 30, and you'd use 15 to put a new line in, but eventually, you would sometimes run out of numbers. So, you'd renumber the app, and start again. Those were the days....
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
-
"to suit his hippy ideals.", nope : to suit his COMMUNISM ideals ! GPL addicts' favorite claim is : "All your code belongs to us !" If they dared to make the addition GPLed, imagine that every part of code should be now 'open' for their own benefit ! Kochise
In Code we trust !
Yeah, but then I'd sound like Stan....
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
-
Hi, I asked someone at the Free Software Foundation this question, wasn't entirely satisfied with the answer and was really keen to get the input from CP members. Let's say that I develop a commercial product using my own code and I provide an API that allows the end user to develop plugin DLL's for various integration tasks. If the end user develops a plugin that essentially wraps GPL'ed code (maybe he found GPL code that does what he wants it to do), is the entire product now subject to the GPL requirements or simply just the plugin DLL? I would guess that only the plugin needs to be published under the GPL, not the entire product. Your thoughts? Btw the FSF guy said the entire product must be released under the GPL.
I think that earlier versions (>5 years ago) of the GPL were so infectious that this would have been (or seemed to have been) the case. I remember writing to FSF/GNU that this makes it impossible to do release any Windows application under the GPL, or use any GPL-ed code with Windows, because there is no access to Windows source code. I never got a response, but the GPL was modified about a year after that. As mentioned above, the LGPL (lesser or library GPL) specifically covers things like this, where you would only have to release code to any changes made to the library itself, not the application using it. I think that if you look at the wording of recent copies of the GPL today, this kind of thing is covered. Peace!
-=- James
Please rate this message - let me know if I helped or not! * * *If you think it costs a lot to do it right, just wait until you find out how much it costs to do it wrong!
Avoid driving a vehicle taller than you and remember that Professional Driver on Closed Course does not mean your Dumb Ass on a Public Road!
See DeleteFXPFiles -
I remember on the Apple ][, a program that would renumber your app, so you'd start with 10, 20, 30, and you'd use 15 to put a new line in, but eventually, you would sometimes run out of numbers. So, you'd renumber the app, and start again. Those were the days....
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
I thought that there was a
renumbercommand that would do this...? Peace!-=- James
Please rate this message - let me know if I helped or not! * * *If you think it costs a lot to do it right, just wait until you find out how much it costs to do it wrong!
Avoid driving a vehicle taller than you and remember that Professional Driver on Closed Course does not mean your Dumb Ass on a Public Road!
See DeleteFXPFiles -
Hi, I asked someone at the Free Software Foundation this question, wasn't entirely satisfied with the answer and was really keen to get the input from CP members. Let's say that I develop a commercial product using my own code and I provide an API that allows the end user to develop plugin DLL's for various integration tasks. If the end user develops a plugin that essentially wraps GPL'ed code (maybe he found GPL code that does what he wants it to do), is the entire product now subject to the GPL requirements or simply just the plugin DLL? I would guess that only the plugin needs to be published under the GPL, not the entire product. Your thoughts? Btw the FSF guy said the entire product must be released under the GPL.
Jim is right, the GPL covers the entire product, LGPL was specifically created as a "DLL-only GPL".
Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Velopers, Develprs, Developers!
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
Linkify!|Fold With Us! -
Just the DLL. If I write a Windows Explorer extension, and use GPL'd code, by his argument, Microsoft would then be forced to release the whole Windows codebase under GPL.
You can't release a Shell Extension under GPL.
Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Velopers, Develprs, Developers!
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
Linkify!|Fold With Us! -
I remember on the Apple ][, a program that would renumber your app, so you'd start with 10, 20, 30, and you'd use 15 to put a new line in, but eventually, you would sometimes run out of numbers. So, you'd renumber the app, and start again. Those were the days....
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
-
I thought that there was a
renumbercommand that would do this...? Peace!-=- James
Please rate this message - let me know if I helped or not! * * *If you think it costs a lot to do it right, just wait until you find out how much it costs to do it wrong!
Avoid driving a vehicle taller than you and remember that Professional Driver on Closed Course does not mean your Dumb Ass on a Public Road!
See DeleteFXPFilesNo, it was a program. I think it came from Beagle Bros.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
-
You can't release a Shell Extension under GPL.
Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Velopers, Develprs, Developers!
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
Linkify!|Fold With Us!I think you can, at least now. I think the GPL now has language that specifically excludes things like OS-specific libraries from the GPL infection.
GPL states:
The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable.
**_However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable._**This addition gets around things like RTL libraries, OS APIs, etc. Peace!
-=- James
Please rate this message - let me know if I helped or not! * * *If you think it costs a lot to do it right, just wait until you find out how much it costs to do it wrong!
Avoid driving a vehicle taller than you and remember that Professional Driver on Closed Course does not mean your Dumb Ass on a Public Road!
See DeleteFXPFiles -
Just the DLL. If I write a Windows Explorer extension, and use GPL'd code, by his argument, Microsoft would then be forced to release the whole Windows codebase under GPL.
Because Windows Explorer is "normally distributed with the major components of the operating system" that your extension could be distributed on its own under the GPL. (Section 3 of the GPL.) Unfortunatly there doesn't seem to be any such exclusion covering extensions or plug-ins for programs that are not distributed with the OS, so a plug-in containing GPL code for a non-GPL application can't be distributed.
-
I remember on the Apple ][, a program that would renumber your app, so you'd start with 10, 20, 30, and you'd use 15 to put a new line in, but eventually, you would sometimes run out of numbers. So, you'd renumber the app, and start again. Those were the days....
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
-
Hi, I asked someone at the Free Software Foundation this question, wasn't entirely satisfied with the answer and was really keen to get the input from CP members. Let's say that I develop a commercial product using my own code and I provide an API that allows the end user to develop plugin DLL's for various integration tasks. If the end user develops a plugin that essentially wraps GPL'ed code (maybe he found GPL code that does what he wants it to do), is the entire product now subject to the GPL requirements or simply just the plugin DLL? I would guess that only the plugin needs to be published under the GPL, not the entire product. Your thoughts? Btw the FSF guy said the entire product must be released under the GPL.
RichardBrock wrote:
Btw the FSF guy said the entire product must be released under the GPL
Of course he did. :rolleyes: Seriously unless you want to drink the coolaid and join that cult avoid the GPL like the plague. If you don't you'll end up just as bat shit insane as Stallman.
-
RichardBrock wrote:
Btw the FSF guy said the entire product must be released under the GPL
Of course he did. :rolleyes: Seriously unless you want to drink the coolaid and join that cult avoid the GPL like the plague. If you don't you'll end up just as bat shit insane as Stallman.
John Cardinal wrote:
as bat sh*t insane as Stallman
I'll have you know the bats that live in my attic find your comparison highly offensive, and insist upon an immediate retraction and apology.
Software Zen:
delete this; -
I think you can, at least now. I think the GPL now has language that specifically excludes things like OS-specific libraries from the GPL infection.
GPL states:
The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable.
**_However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable._**This addition gets around things like RTL libraries, OS APIs, etc. Peace!
-=- James
Please rate this message - let me know if I helped or not! * * *If you think it costs a lot to do it right, just wait until you find out how much it costs to do it wrong!
Avoid driving a vehicle taller than you and remember that Professional Driver on Closed Course does not mean your Dumb Ass on a Public Road!
See DeleteFXPFilesThat actually sounds reasonable... :confused:
Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Velopers, Develprs, Developers!
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
Linkify!|Fold With Us!