Hi, Le lundi 26 mars 2012 21:32:31, G. Allegri a écrit : > Ah, Tim, it's getting clear. Thanks. > The key point is distribution, as always with GPL. > In my case I won't distribute the ESRI geoprocessing libraries, they're > part of the ArcGIS distribution, which is only availbale to users having it > installed on they're computers. > > The import satement will success only if the user have the ArcGIS product > installed, otherwise it will fail. As a consequence I felt I could freely > distribute my plugin as it doesn't strictly require the proprietary side to > run. No you are wrong, as soon as your plugin is distributed and linked with arcgis, you have to licence everything as GPL and therefore provide sources.
> Doesn't GDAL do the same with ECW?! Ok GDAL are LGPL. Is this the key > difference? Yes > Moreover it doesn't expose the QGis APIs to ArcGIS, and viceversa, so it > only bridges the two world to interchange the data. Bridging with an import is a link. If you want to exchange data, do it without the import and separate your modules. please re-read my post and mentionned the FSF faq. Everything is in there. Vincent > > giovanni > > > 2012/3/26 Tim Sutton <[email protected]> > > > Hi > > > > On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 4:52 PM, G. Allegri <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Through the various considerations on this topic there are two > > > positions > > > > the > > > > > seems contradictory to me: > > > > > > "I did some research on this, and the conclusion is that import is > > > functionally and legally equivalent to linking during compilation, so > > > everything that imports qgis must be GPL." [1] > > > > So if you plan to distribute although technically possible to link to > > a proprietary module, its not legall possible. > > > > > then > > > > > > "you can import/link proprietary code into gpl code, provided you have > > > a license to do it." > > > > So if you have the license to ESRI etc. to use their libraries you are > > welcome to make yourself a QGIS frontend to ArcSomething, but you cant > > legally distribute that. > > > > > They probably mean different things and they're not in contradiction. > > > > Being > > > > > an important point to me, could you help in understanding it? > > > > Above is my understanding of those points anyway.... > > > > Regards > > > > Tim > > > > > thanks a lot, > > > Giovanni > > > > > > > > > [1] > > > > http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/2012-March/018976.html > > > > > [2] > > > > http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/2012-March/019000.html > > > > > 2012/3/26 G. Allegri <[email protected]> > > > > > >> I think you're right but watch the reality from a worldwide point of > > > > view. > > > > >> I work mostly with foreign countries, not EU/USA. National offices and > > >> agencies budgets are far beyond the license fees, so they don't care > > > > for it > > > > >> very much. They pay yearly for something that already do the work they > > > > need, > > > > >> without having to do contracts for development, define requirements, > > > > etc. > > > > >> This is the reality. In my courses, even those based on ESRI software, > > >> I always introduce FOSS solutions. Sometimes it raises interest, most > > >> of > > > > times > > > > >> they don't care. They want the job done, and they don't pay for the > > > > license. > > > > >> That's it. > > >> > > >> Anyway, if I wouldn't think that (most) of times a free solution could > > > > be > > > > >> the best way, I wouldn't be here to talk about it ;) > > >> > > >> giovanni > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> 2012/3/26 Sandro Santilli <[email protected]> > > >> > > >>> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 03:31:53PM +0200, G. Allegri wrote: > > >>> > I totally agree with you, but reality is a bit different. Many > > >>> > agencies, > > >>> > corporates, etc. are not considering to leave they're > > >>> > infrastructure. > > >>> > > >>> It's their choice, they'll have to bear the consequences of that. > > >>> > > >>> > I suggest solutions to interoperate, not to switch the whole thing. > > >>> > > >>> What I'm saying is that it just costs more. And rightly so. > > >>> It is no interest of the free software users to make it any cheaper, > > >>> IMHO. > > >>> > > >>> > It would be easier, and a lot cheeper, if everybody talked one > > >>> > language. > > >>> > > >>> +1 > > >>> > > >>> > But we have hundreads of languages in the world, and we have to > > >>> > deal with > > >>> > this. > > >>> > > >>> People grow up learning the language of their mothers. > > >>> Nobody has to pay a license to _use_ that language. > > >>> And anyone can learn. > > >>> We're really not talking about the same thing. > > >>> > > >>> --strk; > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Qgis-developer mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > > > > -- > > Tim Sutton - QGIS Project Steering Committee Member (Release Manager) > > ============================================== > > Please do not email me off-list with technical > > support questions. Using the lists will gain > > more exposure for your issues and the knowledge > > surrounding your issue will be shared with all. > > > > Visit http://linfiniti.com to find out about: > > * QGIS programming and support services > > * Mapserver and PostGIS based hosting plans > > * FOSS Consulting Services > > > > Skype: timlinux > > Irc: timlinux on #qgis at freenode.net > > ============================================== _______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
