Re: about the GPL version, and password protection...

Peter Haworth wrote: I'm still somewhat confused by GPS licensing for plugins, especially helpers like my lcStackbrowser. It's purely a dev tool, nothing to be included in a standalone. I'm under the impression I cannot charge for it under the GPS license. The GPL does not place any restriction

Re: about the GPL version, and password protection...

On 19/02/2013, at 12:03 PM, Peter Haworth wrote: > I'm still somewhat confused by GPS licensing for plugins, especially > helpers like my lcStackbrowser. It's purely a dev tool, nothing to be > included in a standalone. I'm under the impression I cannot charge for it > under the GPS license. In t

Re: about the GPL version, and password protection...

Hi Monte, I'm still somewhat confused by GPS licensing for plugins, especially helpers like my lcStackbrowser. It's purely a dev tool, nothing to be included in a standalone. I'm under the impression I cannot charge for it under the GPS license. In the scenario where debs use the gel version and on

Re: about the GPL version, and password protection...

On 19/02/2013, at 6:41 AM, Colin Holgate wrote: > Well, there's your problem then! Hopefully there will be a way for plugin > makers to create plugins that can work for the GPL version, if need be by > using a different way to protect their code. Ideally most will see the advantage of dual li

Re: about the GPL version, and password protection...

On 19/02/2013, at 6:33 AM, Colin Holgate wrote: > As I mentioned, someone may be doing a personal project, and are not going to > be releasing their app at all, should it then matter if it uses non-GPL code? I don't believe the GPL applies until distribution. > > Also, suppose someone makes

Re: about the GPL version, and password protection...

Well, there's your problem then! Hopefully there will be a way for plugin makers to create plugins that can work for the GPL version, if need be by using a different way to protect their code. On Feb 18, 2013, at 2:36 PM, Monte Goulding wrote: > > >The engine needs to decode the scripts to ex

Re: about the GPL version, and password protection...

On 19/02/2013, at 6:23 AM, Colin Holgate wrote: > Is that true? Isn't the password protect to stop you from looking at the > scripts? Most people won't want to look at the scripts. Any attempts to > decode the password should fail silently. The engine needs to decode the scripts to execute t

Re: about the GPL version, and password protection...

On Feb 18, 2013, at 11:33 AM, Colin Holgate wrote: > I'm arguing that protected plugins should function just fine in the GPL > version of LiveCode. The password protection routines won't be needed, > because the user won't be attempting to look at the scripts in the protected > plugin. The

Re: about the GPL version, and password protection...

As I mentioned, someone may be doing a personal project, and are not going to be releasing their app at all, should it then matter if it uses non-GPL code? Also, suppose someone makes a graphics utility plugin, that is solely used for creating graphics (non of its code will be in the final app),

Re: about the GPL version, and password protection...

Colin Holgate wrote: > Isn't the password protect to stop you from looking at the scripts? Right, and the GPL requires sharing the source, so password protection isn't relevant in any work governed by the GPL. Those who want to protect their code can use the Commercial Edition. -- Richard Ga

Re: about the GPL version, and password protection...

No it's just password protected ones it can't run. The GPL version can't have the password protection code otherwise it would risk everyone's commercial code. Even the enterprise source version will not have that code open but as an object file/library. -- M E R Goulding Software development se

Re: about the GPL version, and password protection...

Is that true? Isn't the password protect to stop you from looking at the scripts? Most people won't want to look at the scripts. Any attempts to decode the password should fail silently. On Feb 18, 2013, at 2:18 PM, "J. Landman Gay" wrote: > >Correct. The free version will not contain any of t

Re: about the GPL version, and password protection...

Rolf Kocherhans wrote: Am I right that this also means that password protected plugins like, for example, the great tmControl from Scott Rossi will NOT work with the free version ? Correct. The free version will not contain any of the code that deciphers passwords, which means it cannot open

Re: about the GPL version, and password protection...

Rolf Kocherhans wrote: Am I right that this also means that password protected plugins like, for example, the great tmControl from Scott Rossi will NOT work with the free version ? The GNU Public License is based on The Four Freedoms, as I outlined here on the 1st:

Re: about the GPL version, and password protection...

I somehow feel that they would work, but, you wouldn't be able to ship an application that used them, unless you had the commercial license. Perhaps Scott will do what Malte is choosing to do? On Feb 18, 2013, at 9:06 AM, Rolf Kocherhans wrote: > Am I right that this also means that password

Re: about the GPL version, and password protection...

Am I right that this also means that password protected plugins like, for example, the great tmControl from Scott Rossi will NOT work with the free version ? Cheers Rolf ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url t

Re: about the GPL version, and password protection...

You are correct that the server version will not include the password protection module. The encryption functions will be in the GPL version. Those functions do not relate in any way to the password protection of stacks. Kind regards, Kevin Kevin Miller ~ ke...@runrev.com ~ http://www.runrev.co

Re: about the GPL version, and password protection...

Hi, as I mentionned earlier on int that thread : http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Open-source-LC-server-and-revigniter-td4660146.html Jacqueline Landman Gay made a comprhensive answer as the most probable position :

Re: about the GPL version, and password protection...

OK, interested to see it. On 15/02/2013, at 7:14 AM, Colin Holgate wrote: > They were debating where to post the recording. It was recorded thought. -- Monte Goulding M E R Goulding - software development services mergExt - There's an external for that! ___

Re: about the GPL version, and password protection...

They were debating where to post the recording. It was recorded thought. On Feb 14, 2013, at 3:01 PM, Monte Goulding wrote: > >Is there a transcript anywhere for those of us that were sound asleep? ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.run

Re: about the GPL version, and password protection...

Is there a transcript anywhere for those of us that were sound asleep? -- Monte Goulding M E R Goulding - software development services mergExt - There's an external for that! ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit

Re: about the GPL version, and password protection...

On 2/14/13 12:11 PM, Colin Holgate wrote: Some questions came up on the call about why the GPL version can't have the password protection code in it. It seems obvious to me why that would be the case, but maybe there's a complication I'm not seeing? No, I think you understand it. I seems obviou