--- On Mon, 11/15/10, Matt Ebb <m...@mke3.net> wrote:
> From: Matt Ebb <m...@mke3.net> > Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] extension clause > To: "bf-blender developers" <bf-committers@blender.org> > Received: Monday, November 15, 2010, 5:01 PM > On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 8:58 AM, Dan > Eicher <d...@trollwerks.org> > wrote: > > There's actually two issues being discussed here, the > ability to use GPL'd > > software *in house* and the ability to distribute > non-GPL'd extensions. > > Actually three if you count what I raised: the ability to > distributed > open source extensions that link to closed libraries (eg. a > plugin > connection to a commercial renderer). That's not a big issue though, you can either go out of process (that's permitted by the GPL) or have a shim that's independant from Blender in a looser license (BSD, MIT, ...), in essence making your Blender extension depend on your other module. Martin _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
