Am Freitag 23 Januar 2009 08:48:53 schrieb Alon Bar-Lev: > So the rules of having a plugin to GPL or LGPL should be the same.
absolutely not. LGPL is "make changes to my code open source under LGPL, but any code you write on your own is yours to keep" from my point of view. Thus keeping totaly new code such as a new driver closed is perfectly fine with me. It does not matter to me, whether that driver is loaded as binary plugin, or whether a modified version of opensc was created. I prefer the "belpic" way: rename opensc, enhance it, make the result public including source (best completely, but keeping one object private is fine with me too). > PKCS#11 or any standard interface which is not depended on a specific > implementation, is an edge condition I discussed with FSF and they > agreed that as long the application and the provider have not implicit > or explicit knowledge about each other it is OK. hmm. I always wondered if loading binary only pkcs#11 libraries via pam_p11/pkcs11 into login and gdm/kdm would be ok. Regards, Andreas _______________________________________________ opensc-devel mailing list opensc-devel@lists.opensc-project.org http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
