Indeed. Which brings back the web services loophole.
I reread about it, and it appears it wasn't eventually closed in GPLv3: they
created the Affero GPL for that specific purpose.
http://gplv3.fsf.org/agplv3-dd1-guide.htmlI suppose this improves the likelihood of more code being moved over to
GPLv3. The AGPL provisions should only appeal to a limited crowd.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Eaton" <
jeff@...>
To: <
development@...>
Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2007 8:19 PM
Subject: Re: [development] Modules that integrate non-GPL PHP appsviolatethe
GPL.
> On Aug 30, 2007, at 1:06 PM, FGM wrote:
>
> > So code released under a non-GPL license can be checked into
> > Drupal's CVS
> > repository, as long as:
> > - it is also released under the GPL
> > - the other license does not prevent it.
>
> FGM, that's correct. Sorry I was unclear when I said that. :)
>
> The only caveat mentioned by the FSF was that such dual-licensing
> would NOT be an acceptable workaround to the 'bridge code' problem.
> In other words, "Drupal is GPL, my module is GPL AND LGPL, so the
> piece that connects to my module isn't affected by the GPL" is
> invalid due to the fact that anything sharing address space with
> Drupal (ie, included PHP files) has to be compatible with ITS
> license, not just the module's license.
>
> --Jeff
>
