LCDproc development and user support list

Text archives Help


GPL and loadable module + Re: [Lcdproc] Re: API-v0.5: drvthis and private_data (comment in CVS)


Chronological Thread 
  • From: reenoo AT gmx.de (Rene Wagner)
  • Subject: GPL and loadable module + Re: [Lcdproc] Re: API-v0.5: drvthis and private_data (comment in CVS)
  • Date: Thu Dec 6 20:09:01 2001

"David GLAUDE Mailing"
<dglaudemailing AT gmx.net>
wrote:
> GPL first as it might be very important...

GPL IS VERY IMPORTANT ! ;)

> We are going to introduce loadable module in lcdproc API v0.5.
> 1) This mean from a technical point of view that other program could use
> our module for displaying on LCD.
> 2) Also from a technical point of view it also mean that someone could
> write a module without giving the code for it.
>
> AFAIK our little project is GNU GPL licenced. [it should be put on top of
> every file!!!]

I'll add a reference to the GNU GPL on top of all my files.
But don't we also have to name all the developer of code we use in our
different drivers.
I've taken some code from the MtxOrb, curses and sed1330 drivers and
modified the code to work for my display. (Anything else seems to me like
reinventing the wheel ;)
Unfortunately I don't know all the authors of the drivers.
BUT I DEFINITELY DO WANT TO RESPECT THEIR COPYRIGHTS.
So what can I / we do?
Well .. of course I can name those authors I know of ;)

>
> So (1) and (2) are linking GPL to potentially non-GPL code.
> We need to know what the GPL say about this and what we want about this.
> I know this is a potential loophole in the GPL and at least Linux kernel is
> having an issue with this.
> Linus choose to accept non-GPL module to supporte closed module.
> And RMS is not happy about this at all.
>
> Most of us are Linux user, a few Solaris and some FreeBSD (and they
> complain about portability).
> This might mean we have peaple with 3 differents mindset, free/closed/open.
> ;-)
> But we are here on the same project and need to know what is possible (from
> a licence point of view)
> and what we really want.
>
> I need main developper input on this issue.

Am I a "main developer"? ;)

> It is a VERY important issue for me.
> I personnaly don't wan't a closed application to benefit from my free work.

extract from the GPL 2:
"This General Public License does not permit incorporating your program into
proprietary programs. If your program is a subroutine library, you may
consider it more useful to permit linking proprietary applications with the
library. If this is what you want to do, use the GNU Library General
Public License instead of this License."

> If they want to use part of my work on MtxOrb driver, they can talk the
> protocol
> and connect to LCDd accross the network.

Agreed.

Rene





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.18.

Top of page