Michael Schnell wrote:
He also wants to use closed source 3rd party stuff and want to impose copy protection to his projects. All that is rather queer with an open source IDE.
Why? It's not as though he's trying to add non-open components to the published IDE and expecting other people to use them, and since there's no requirement to publish stuff you build using an "open" license (GPL etc.) I don't see that putting copy protection on it makes any difference at all.
The format of binary-distributed libraries etc. could prove to be more of a problem, and consulting Jonas et al. in the fpc-pascal mailing list might be necessary. However I would say that while I recognise that changing the protection "dongle" is obviously a non-starter, I'd be very suspicious of any protection scheme which relies on unpublished source code: such a thing would smack of "security by obscurity" which is universally considered to be a Bad Thing.
-- Mark Morgan Lloyd markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk [Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues] -- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
