Hi, Actually I disagree ;)
From reading below the question is "is it an independent and separate work"? The GNU FAQ says its not: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLAndPlugins Thanx, Jaap [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 07/11/2007 10:45:27 AM: > >> No, you can't keep the code for you nor limit the distribution of the >> plugin object code. It is the basic principle of the GPL. If you're >> distributing/selling your plugin, you have to distribute the code. And >> everyone receiving (paying for) this code may distribute it again and >> again ... without your permission :) > > Actually, I'd dissagree. With GPL v2, there is a clause that a > developer can invoke if they write their code appropriately, > and if the 'infrastructure' can support it. > > GPL 2 Section 2 paragraph 2, 3 and 4 cover this aspect. > (Note GPL v3, no longer appears to have these clauses.) > > Basically... > a) if the infrastructure can support 3rd party code invoked > dynamically at run time, and > b) if the infrastructure does not 'depend' on the 3rd party > code for its operation, and > c) if your code is not statically linked with GPL'ed code > > then you can release a binary-only version of your code without > providing source. > > So to paraphrase: > - if Wireshark isn't linked with your code, and > - Wireshark can still function without your code, and > - your code isn't linked to GPL'ed code, and > - someone can replace your code with an equivalent (but seperately > developed) module > then your OK. > > FYI. Those paragraphs state: > > "These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. > If identifiable sections of that work are not derived from > the Program, and can be reasonably considered independent > and separate works in themselves, then this License, and > its terms, do not apply to those sections when you distribute > them as separate works. But when you distribute the same > sections as part of a whole which is a work based on the > Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms > of this License, whose permissions for other licensees extend > to the entire whole, and thus to each and every part > regardless of who wrote it. > > Thus, it is not the intent of this section to claim rights or > contest your rights to work written entirely by you; rather, > the intent is to exercise the right to control the distribution > of derivative or collective works based on the Program.\ > > In addition, mere aggregation of another work not based on the > Program with the Program (or with a work based on the Program) > on a volume of a storage or distribution medium does not bring > the other work under the scope of this License." > > >> Jon Andersen wrote: >>> I'm concerned about the requirements of the GPLv2 license. >>> >>> If I write a plugin for Wireshark, which compiles to a plugin DLL only, >>> and then I distribute the plugin DLL, am I required by the GPL license >>> to distribute the source (and for anyone I distribute it to, they can >>> redistribute the source even if I don't want them to)? >>> >>> I'm wondering if I can legally distribute only the plugin DLL (and > limit >>> the distribution of it), and not distribute the source at all. _______________________________________________ Wireshark-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
