On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 9:11 AM, Steve McMahon <[email protected]> wrote: > The FAQ is pretty good on these issues. To quote from it: > > """ ... > It is possible to create an add-on product that does not exhibit these > behaviors (many generic Zope products that are not specific to Plone, and > some Plone themes, do not). Such products need not belicensed under the GPL. > """
One option I have used is to split packages: "frameworky" stuff that can live "underneath" Plone and just depend on lower-levels of the stack (including the BSD-licensed framework components) go into an MIT-licensed package (my employer's legal folks prefer using this license when possible), while the application integration of it in Plone is GPLv2. This had the positive side-effect of making me create a CMFDefault fixture for plone.testing (since plone.app.testing is GPL) -- incidentally, the CMFDefault fixture runs integration tests for the framework-level package much faster. You could certainly package proprietary/non-free or non-GPL FOSS components this way, and build a GPL'd plone app/product/add-on on top of them. Also, AFAICT, mere aggregation is not subject to viral nature of GPL: e.g. having a proprietary JavaScript plugin, or some such thing that only talks with Plone via network APIs. Sean _______________________________________________ Product-Developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/plone-product-developers
