Maixm: I share your point of view, I am not the one that you need to argument against :) However the GPL folks are quite confident that they are right: http://markmail.org/message/33hztgfyfxdb3jef
"If the program dynamically links plug-ins, and they make function calls to each other and share data structures, we believe they form a single program, which must be treated as an extension of both the main program and the plug-ins. This means the plug-ins must be released under the GPL or a GPL-compatible free software license, and that the terms of the GPL must be followed when those plug-ins are distributed." I don't know if this argumentation is correct, as did Jukka say: It has kind of a "viral" factor. But as he did further explain: We do accept the wishes of other communities beyond the laws. And the Moodle community really wants for example plugins to be released under the GPL. *Even if we ignore that angle for a moment, my perspective has always been that it's simply not possible to develop code "100% from scratch" in the real world. Developers always copy existing code, and thus the new code needs to follow the same license.* Quote from Martin Dougiamas <https://moodle.org/user/view.php?id=1&course=5>Founder Moodle at: https://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=135896 Actually the Plugin loader at Moodle.org even checks if the plugin has GPL license file. They do not allow other plugins to be uploaded. Sebastian 2012/10/12 Maxim Solodovnik <[email protected]> > I always thought calling any methods under any license does not add any > restrictions to your code. > Google was able to implement Java and it was not violation :) > > > On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 2:15 PM, [email protected] < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > * limit GPL-licensed plug-ins to minimal API calls (over http);* > > => I don't know how that would practically be implemented? You cannot > call > > Drupal functions via HTTP, or access the Drupal/Moodle/Joomla user > session > > object and ask about user- or access rights via HTTP. > > Those plugin specific API calls always will be part of the plugin itself > > and never performed via HTTP. > > > > My idea was more like: > > > > > http://code.google.com/a/apache-extras.org/p/openmeetings-moodle-plugin/source/browse/trunk/openmeetings_gateway.php > > and: > > > > > http://code.google.com/a/apache-extras.org/p/openmeetings-moodle-plugin/source/browse/trunk/lib/openmeetings_rest_service.php > > > > Those are files that are shared among all plugins. We could bundle those > > files and make a general integration SDK and distribute it under the > Apache > > License as they do not contain any Drupal/Moodle/Joomla/platform xyz > > specific code. > > > > The plugins could use this SDK plus add the platform specific code and > then > > distribute at apache-extras.org. > > > > Sebastian > > > > 2012/10/11 Alexei Fedotov <[email protected]> > > > > > So my take on this is the following: > > > > > > 1) limit GPL-licensed plug-ins to minimal API calls (over http); > > > 2) move any complex logic to our side (to Openmeetings services, or > > > standalone services which do more elaborate calls to Openmeetings). > > > > > > We are pretty close to this anyway. > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 10:17 PM, [email protected] < > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > The general "echo" is rather negative. > > > > > > > > For example Sam Ruby's answer a time ago was: > > > > *The operative phrase here being "the terms of the GPL must be > followed > > > > when those plug-ins are distributed." This really sounds more like > > > > something that would be made available at Apache Extras:* > > > > Quoted from: http://markmail.org/message/33hztgfyfxdb3jef > > > > > > > > Other follow up that, for example Jukka Zitting did say: > > > > *I agree with that argument against the viral nature of GPL, but in > > > general > > > > the ASF has tended to honor the wishes of upstream copyright owners > > also > > > > beyond the requirements of copyright law.* > > > > Quoted from: http://markmail.org/message/je5hzdocsloofidd > > > > > > > > So if the Vice President of Legal Affairs of the Apache Foundation > and > > > the > > > > chair of the Apache Incubator thinks that it would be rather better > to > > > > release those plugins outside of the ASF I think chances to release > > them > > > > inside require very good arguments and lot of time. > > > > > > > > I agree to your position that it _should_ be possible to release > under > > > the > > > > Apache License, but I think we should not make the graduation of our > > > > project depending on the legal status of the plugins. > > > > If the final decision is that its okay to release them under the > Apache > > > > License => Great! We can still move them to Apache at any time. > > > > > > > > After all this looks like some kind of blocker that keeps us away > from > > > > moving forward. apache-extras.org might be a good way to resolve > this > > > and > > > > keep concentrating on enhancing our core product. > > > > > > > > Sebastian > > > > > > > > 2012/10/11 Maxim Solodovnik <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > I always thought that since our code contains zero lines of code > > under > > > > > incompatible license we are free to release it under ASF. I do > > remember > > > > > this was confirmed by last email from legal team > > > > > On Oct 11, 2012 9:24 PM, "[email protected]" < > > > [email protected]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > before we try to organize a Vote for graduation it might makes > > sense > > > to > > > > > > clean up plugins from the SVN that have unclear legal status. > > > > > > > > > > > > I started to move Moodle to apache-extras.org and Drupal. Cause > > the > > > > > > discussion already has gone quite far that it is not acceptable > to > > > > > > distribute them at the ASF. > > > > > > > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > > > > > > > Sebastian > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Sebastian Wagner > > > > > > https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock > > > > > > http://www.webbase-design.de > > > > > > http://www.wagner-sebastian.com > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Sebastian Wagner > > > > https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock > > > > http://www.webbase-design.de > > > > http://www.wagner-sebastian.com > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Sebastian Wagner > > https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock > > http://www.webbase-design.de > > http://www.wagner-sebastian.com > > [email protected] > > > > > > -- > WBR > Maxim aka solomax > -- Sebastian Wagner https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock http://www.webbase-design.de http://www.wagner-sebastian.com [email protected]
