> > re: "You would not be able to license the plugin as GPL since the main > program isn't" > > This is from the GPL FAQ right? This explanation is established to > deter sneaky developers from developing applications that has a > proprietary layer but will only work with a GPL licensed plug in. For > example if the DAL layer in your (proprietary) application is > plugable, and one such plug in you provide is a "MySQL plug in" > licensed under the GPL (it might be the only one or it might not) , > then you have tried to circumvent the GPL according to the FAQ (that > represents the interpretation of the FSF. ie. this is what the FSF > thinks the words in the GPL license means).
Exactly what I was thinking of. If I distribute an application that uses an abstract data layer and I provide the interface implementation for the plugin with say PostgreSQL plugin, but I do not distribute plugins for GPL licensed databases, there are no license issues. If someone else (a customer maybe) creates a plugin that interfaces to MySQL, that should not be license issue for the original program. Could it be licensed under GPL by the developer or would it be a violation against MySQL's license? - Sami --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DbLinq" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/dblinq?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
