Confused was not an offense, "GPL license" is patently not the same as
"GPL-compatible license" so it is a legitimate reason to be confused.
Please avoid unnecessary and unfair characterizations of my words.
And I will not revert it on that basis. I will revert it if my
understanding of the our license requirements is wrong or flawed. It is
not OK for you to exempt some use-case from the license terms under
which every developer contributes to this project.
Gerald can revert it if he wishes and I will respect it. As project lead
he can make that call.
On 04/12/23 12:35, Roland Knall wrote:
I do not think there is a need for calling someone confused.
The whole discussion is not in any way useful for our users. There is
the explicit corporate usecase, where in-house versions do exist with
their own protocols and plugins. Often times those versions do not
even deal with licenses for those modifications at all, and going from
the point that they change the CMakeListsCustom.txt files, one could
argue, that this is not a source code modification in the sense meant
by the gpl license.
Joao, I agree with having a clear path for license application, and I
also agree that we should be prudent on what parts a user can use and
which he can't. I would even be ok if we have a warning in the
build-process, explicitly stating that the code being linked is not
fully compliant and therefore not allowed to be distributed. But I
strongly disagree cutting off the leg we are standing on just on pure
principle. The corporate users are a HUGE part of our userbase. And if
we go down this route, we need to have a proper discussion about this.
Just adding license enforcement without having the discussion is NOT
the way to move forward here.
Please add another patch, which keeps the ABI versioning in (which I
really appreciate and think is a good thing to do), but reverts the
enforcement of the licenses. Then we can start to properly discuss how
to move forward with this topic. It will - most likely - require a
vote by the technical steering comittee.
kind regards
Roland
Am Mo., 4. Dez. 2023 um 13:23 Uhr schrieb João Valverde <j...@v6e.pt>:
On 04/12/23 12:19, João Valverde wrote:
>
>
> On 04/12/23 12:12, Bálint Réczey wrote:
>> João Valverde <j...@v6e.pt> ezt írta (időpont: 2023. dec. 4., H,
12:59):
>>>
>>>
>>> On 03/12/23 23:25, João Valverde wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> There are some changes in progress to the plugin registration
API that
>>>> break compatibility and require manual intervention from plugin
>>>> authors maintaining plugins out-of-tree. These changes are rather
>>>> minor and concern only plugin registration, not other APIs
accessible
>>>> to plugins.
>>>>
>>>> See MR 13524:
>>>> https://gitlab.com/wireshark/wireshark/-/merge_requests/13524
>>>>
>>>> Changes required are rewriting the registration code (very
easy to do
>>>> [1]) and declare (using a C enum) that the plugin is released
either
>>>> under GPLv2 or later, or a GPLv2 compatible license. The
other changes
>>>> to the ABI version number are
>>> The choice of the word "released" here was unfortunate,
because it may
>>> imply distribution. Please consider "licensed" instead.
>>>
>>> The license declaration field just affirms what was already
implicit:
>>> Wireshark plugins must use licensing terms compatible with the GPL
>>> version 2, so there is no policy change there.
>> GPL allows linking and using GPL-licensed software with
>> non-GPL-licensed software locally. This is an important use case of
>> many Wireshark users who do not wish releasing their plugins
and your
>> change broke that. Please revert it.
>>
>
> https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#IfLibraryIsGPL
Also it does not require a GPL license, it requires a GPL-compatible
license, so you may just be confused.
>
>>>> currently not relevant to plugin authors (no policy change is
>>>> implied), it just uses less boilerplate with macros.
>>>>
>>>> This should improve the plug-in experience for both
developers and
>>>> users and may improve compatibility in the future.
>>
>>>> Comments welcome.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> João
>>>>
>>>>
[1]https://gitlab.com/wireshark/wireshark/-/commit/90b16b40921b737aadf9186685d866fd80e37ee6#4a1fe9011e8240918e5fc6230c0bcd2e4d3b9c34
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
___________________________________________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list
<wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>
>>>> Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
>>>> Unsubscribe:
https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
>>>> mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
>>>
___________________________________________________________________________
>>>
>>> Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list
<wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>
>>> Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
>>> Unsubscribe:
https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
>>> mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
>>
___________________________________________________________________________
>>
>> Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list
<wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>
>> Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
>> Unsubscribe:
https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
>> mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
>
>
___________________________________________________________________________
>
> Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list
<wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>
> Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
> mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>
Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>
Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>
Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
