Do you really think this case is a "borderline" one if the plugin is using the wireshark dissection API?
The FAQ pointed by Jaap is about the plug-in mechanism but the plugin is linked with libwireshark which *is* GPLv2. Of course, if you're not dissecting your protocol with the wireshark API, we might start again this discussion but I doubt you can write a functional wireshark plugin dissector without linking to libwireshark. Regards, Sebastien Tandel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 07/11/2007 01:16:26 PM: > >> 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 > > Unfortunately, the FAQ is a FAQ and not the license. > > As you can see, this is someones interpretation of a vague agreement, > just as mine is/was. Even the FAQ uses non-firm phrases like > "we believe", and 'borderline case', then there will be questions. > > And thats why those 'interpretable' statements were removed from GPL 3. > > > > This document is strictly confidential and intended only for use by the > addressee unless otherwise stated. If you are not the intended recipient, > please notify the sender immediately and delete it from your system. > > > _______________________________________________ > Wireshark-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev _______________________________________________ Wireshark-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
