Re: RFS: LeechCraft
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: RFS: LeechCraft
- From: Jonathan Nieder <email@example.com>
- Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 14:55:58 -0600
- Message-id: <20101216205558.GA4060@burratino>
- In-reply-to: <AANLkTik9wtMv9isq1ogfprsD7dFZj=EErM0gZMpXk3Cv@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <AANLkTik-5=eXC4c94BKukb6KSB1YA4Ez2h2yoQDU1ydg@mail.gmail.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <AANLkTik9wtMv9isq1ogfprsD7dFZj=EErM0gZMpXk3Cv@mail.gmail.com>
Daniel Guzanoff wrote:
> Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
>> You build-depend on libcurl4-openssl-dev. I suspect this means
>> the program is linked (possibly indirectly) against openssl. Note
>> that OpenSSL's license is not GPL-compatible.
> This library is linked with plugin (leechcraft-plugin-cftp), not main app.
> Plugins are released under LGPLv3. Is it okay?
Difficult question. You might want to ask debian-legal or get the
license of the main program clarified to allow it. Here's what the
FSF has to say:
| Q: If a program released under the GPL uses plug-ins, what are the
| requirements for the licenses of a plug-in?
| A: It depends on how the program invokes its plug-ins.
| 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,
| 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.
Also see  concerning the OpenSSL/GPL incompatibility. This is
perhaps a strange edge case because the interfaces provided by
libcurl-openssl and libcurl-gnutls are not all that different.
Luckily, that gives an easy way out: does the plugin work when built
Hope that helps,