Justin Seyster writes:
> Thanks for this advice. The link to the GCC Exception was especially helpful.
>
> The trick here is that I'm actually releasing a library designed to be
> linked into plug-ins. I want the library itself to be copyleft but
> for plug-in authors to retain any licensing fl
ion.html
>
> See also the rationale and FAQ that it links to.
>
> Basically, if you use a plugin with gcc, and the plugin is not
> GPL-compatible, then the resulting compiled code is covered by the GPL.
>
>> I vaguely remember a proposal that there would be no restriction on
>
c-exception.html
See also the rationale and FAQ that it links to.
Basically, if you use a plugin with gcc, and the plugin is not
GPL-compatible, then the resulting compiled code is covered by the GPL.
> I vaguely remember a proposal that there would be no restriction on
> plug-in licensin
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 16:05:51 -0400
Justin Seyster wrote:
> I'm getting ready to release plug-in code, and I want to have a very
> clear idea about licensing before I release. I'm leaning towards
> releasing everything as GPLv3, but I do want to know exactly what is
> and isn't allowed.
A defini
-in support
got added, but my understanding is that there was a final consensus.
I can't find one document though that explains exactly what this
consensus was.
I vaguely remember a proposal that there would be no restriction on
plug-in licensing but that non-free plug-ins could only be
