Re: Licensing for Nautilus extensions
- From: Brian Cameron <Brian Cameron Sun COM>
- To: Alexander Larsson <alexl redhat com>
- Cc: David Powell Sun COM, nautilus-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: Licensing for Nautilus extensions
- Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 12:47:10 -0500
We've never thought much about this. Extensions are only linked to a
LGPL library, but that is a very thin API that redirects to the
implementation which is mainly GPL. I think this means that the
extensions have to be GPL or at least GPL compatible, but IANAL.
Since this is a public integration point, it seems the documentation
should make this a bit more clear. At the very least, it should be
documented that extensions link against LGPL, so a plugin shouldn't
be written with a LGPL incompatible license seems the sort of minimal
documentation that would be useful. Should there be something like
a COPYING.PLUGINS file that could make this more clear?
I added this:
Thanks. I think it is good to make this sort of thing more clear.
Doesn't nautilus have a few other integration points such as
"nautilus scripts"? Might be good if this file also made mention about
any licensing issues (or lack of any) for all the commonly used
integration points for extending nautilus.
] [Thread Prev