Does RealBot "WIP" version have to be open source?

[Whistler]

The FSF web site has this:


If a program released under the GPL uses plug-ins, what are the requirements for the licenses of a plug-in.

It depends on how the program invokes its plug-ins. If the program uses fork and exec to invoke plug-ins, then the plug-ins are separate programs, so the license for the main program makes no requirements for them. 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, so plug-ins must be treated as extensions to the main program. This means they 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.

If the program dynamically links plug-ins, but the communication between them is limited to invoking the `main' function of the plug-in with some options and waiting for it to return, that is a borderline case.



Original location:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLAndPlugins


Metamod is GPL, and MM plugins, obviously, are "dynamic link" plugins...

WIP only uses wip as its transport perm, in other words it uses under 1% of MM's base code, so it doesnt fall under the GPL, if WIP was to go full version and then use more than 5% it would fall under the GPL and as such have to be OS.

[stefanhendriks]

In theory, i should release source of every WIP. But i won't, and you can't make me I will however think very hard about releasing the source for any official version. As WIP is not an official version, i don't have to officially release the source imo.

Besides that, the source changes so often, i am not going to support a source that changes so much.

Originally Posted by stefanhendriks

Besides that, the source changes so often, i am not going to support a source that changes so much.

uhh.. development versions in general dont have to be supported at all, so this isnt really a reason not to release the source

btw did you read my rant thread in the off-topic forum? it was about the rb homepage

[botmeister]

The HL SDK 2.3 license ("EULA") is not based on the GPL license. According to its contents any source code created out of the SDK does not have to be released as OS. However if released in object form it must be free of charge.

Extract from the SDK 2.3 EULA

"Whereas, Licensee wishes to develop a modified game running only on the Half-Life engine (a "Mod") for free distribution in object code form only to licensed end users of Half-Life;"

I saw nothing in the EULA stating that the source code must also be released.

If I can remember correctly, previous SDK's did require that the source code had to be released, but I'm not sure anymore.

Originally Posted by botmeister

The HL SDK 2.3 license ("EULA") is not based on the GPL license. According to its contents any source code created out of the SDK does not have to be released as OS. However if released in object form it must be free of charge.

Extract from the SDK 2.3 EULA

"Whereas, Licensee wishes to develop a modified game running only on the Half-Life engine (a "Mod") for free distribution in object code form only to licensed end users of Half-Life;"

I saw nothing in the EULA stating that the source code must also be released.

If I can remember correctly, previous SDK's did require that the source code had to be released, but I'm not sure anymore.

erm, you missed the point.. they were talking about the metamod license, which seems to be GPL... and RB is a metamod plugin now...

[botmeister]

Originally Posted by Mike

erm, you missed the point.. they were talking about the metamod license, which seems to be GPL... and RB is a metamod plugin now...

Ah! ur right

[Whistler]

Originally Posted by Ava3ar

WIP only uses wip as its transport perm, in other words it uses under 1% of MM's base code, so it doesnt fall under the GPL, if WIP was to go full version and then use more than 5% it would fall under the GPL and as such have to be OS.

...But according to that piece of text in GNU web page, any MM plugins should "fall under the GPL"

[stefanhendriks]

I have had long talks with PMB about this, as he suggested to convert RB into MM much longer ago. This is one of the things that kept me from doing it. So i take the mid-way. It runs in MM, but i won't release the source until i find its ready to. People have to be satisfied with that for the time being.

[Whistler]

Okay, I'll stop this....
Actually your change log does help me a little ...... ;D

P.S. You keep saying "learned" in your web pages. That should be "learnt". "learned" means "know everything".