2012/3/26 Alex Mandel <[email protected]> > On 03/26/2012 05:18 AM, G. Allegri wrote: > > 2012/3/26 Carson Farmer <[email protected]> > > > >> Keep in mind it is only a problem if you plan on distributing your > >> plugin... if it is just for internal use then I wouldn't worry about > >> it :-p > >> > > > > Well, it's for a customer, so it could be an issue... > > I totally respect the choice of the developers to use a GPL license, but > I > > agree that an LGPL would cause lesser headaches to support > > interoperability... > > > > giovanni > > > > That depends on how the contract was written then. If it's a work for > hire and you don't own the copyright to what you wrote but the customer > does than the GPL is only an issue if they distribute it beyond their > company. > > I'm sure there's some other way to craft the whole setup, seems like a > gray area for the ecw, mrsid, oracle, mssql drivers being bridged by a > slightly different licensed piece sitting in between. Also see the > discussion on the processing framework with SEXTANTE that license > discussion appears different. >
Everything started from that. I understand it must me GPL, because it depends on the QGis license. It follows that it won't be possible to include proprietary algorithms within SEXTANTE, nor use it in non-free software. > > I admit a QGIS plugin that uses Arcpy sounds a little odd though... > Yes, but it is focused on a specific interoperability task within a mixed free-nonfree workflow. giovanni > > Thanks, > Alex >
_______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
