[Bf-committers] extension clause
dan at trollwerks.org
Mon Nov 22 19:40:20 CET 2010
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 9:02 AM, David Jeske <davidj at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 3:30 PM, Dan Eicher <dan at trollwerks.org> wrote:
>> > I believe it's important to many users (especially, but not limited to
>> > corporate users) to have a secondary 'proprietary plugin market',
>> > That option has been discussed and all but approved, the only hitch is
>> plugin writers also have to write and maintain the BSD (or whatever) api
>> shim code.
> How is legally viable to make a capable BSD licensed API with the code under
> the GPL? The shim would be dependent on material details of the Blender
> design and internals. It would probably expose many of those details (such
> as UI panels, RNA) As a result, the shim should be under the GPL, and as a
> result, the extensions should be under the GPL.
The same way the (BSD licensed) ofx api can load proprietary code/libs.
Blender can link to the header files and the *users* load/link to the
non-gpl compatible external code (which also links to the BSD'd header
files)... everyone gets what they want and no copyrights are violated.
Drinks for everyone!!!
More information about the Bf-committers