On Mon, 2003-06-02 at 15:28, Robert McQueen wrote: > My concern is that even if you distribute > in source form, you're still condoning ignoring part of Gaim's license, > which seems highly dubious. So as well as saying "Debian will never ship > this" as a Debian developer, I was also saying "please do not encourage > your users to ignore our license" as a Gaim contributor. I'd favour that > Gaim-Encryption isn't included by distributors at all until it is > reworked to use GNUTLS as Bill has so kindly agreed to do, hopefully > within the next 2 or 3 weeks.
"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." --http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLAndPlugins This indicates that the plugin must be released by terms of the GPL (or GPL-compatible) license. Obviously now it is not GPL-compatible, regardless of whether it's distributed as source or as binaries. Don't feel compelled to remove your plugin; as long as you're actively working to resolve these issues, I wouldn't worry too much about 29 little words. -s.
