Re: Dia plugins and C++

[Steven Lobbezoo <steven la-france net>]

Microsoft would consider them under liscence.
You should too, if possible. The shapes library will be one of
the main arguments for DIA (;-(()

Steven

le ven 03-05-2002 à 01:32, Lars Clausen a écrit :
> On Fri, 3 May 2002, Hubert Figuiere wrote:
> > According to Cyrille Chepelov <cyrille@chepelov.org>:
> >> Le Thu, May 02, 2002, à 10:02:57AM -0500, Lars Clausen a écrit:
> >> 
> >> > Certainly if you change Dia, you must either not redistribute it or
> >> > send out the source along with it.  Plug-ins I'm not so sure about,
> >> > shapes are probably not covered.  But IANAL.
> >> 
> >> For plug-ins it's up to "us" (ie, all holders of bits of copyright to
> >> the dia code): either we make a Linus Exception (and /all/ agree to do
> >> it), or the basic GPL applies and denies this.
> > 
> > IMHO plugins are GPLed because Dia is GPLed.
>
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCGPLAndPlugins
>
> Given the way our plugins are heavily integrated, any new plugins would
> certainly be GPL'ed.  Unless we choose to make an exception, like Linus and
> ALSA has done.  I think shapes would not be covered, as they a) are not
> code, and b) could be easily used in other programs.
>
> -Lars
>
> -- 
> Lars Clausen (http://shasta.cs.uiuc.edu/~lrclause)| Hårdgrim of Numenor
> "I do not agree with a word that you say, but I   |----------------------------
> will defend to the death your right to say it."   | Where are we going, and
>     --Evelyn Beatrice Hall paraphrasing Voltaire  | what's with the handbasket?
> _______________________________________________
> Dia-list mailing list
> Dia-list@gnome.org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/dia-list
>
>
>