[Bf-committers] extension clause

[Martin Poirier]

--- On Mon, 11/15/10, Matt Ebb <matt at mke3.net> wrote:

> From: Matt Ebb <matt at mke3.net>
> Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] extension clause
> To: "bf-blender developers" <bf-committers at blender.org>
> Received: Monday, November 15, 2010, 5:01 PM
> On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 8:58 AM, Dan
> Eicher <dan at trollwerks.org>
> wrote:
> > There's actually two issues being discussed here, the
> ability to use GPL'd
> > software *in house* and the ability to distribute
> non-GPL'd extensions.
> 
> Actually three if you count what I raised: the ability to
> distributed
> open source extensions that link to closed libraries (eg. a
> plugin
> connection to a commercial renderer).

That's not a big issue though, you can either go out of process (that's permitted by the GPL) or have a shim that's independant from Blender in a looser license (BSD, MIT, ...), in essence making your Blender extension depend on your other module.

Martin