[sldev] Why Linden Labs needs to let the community extend the
client without asking for their IP
Callum Lerwick
seg at haxxed.com
Sun Apr 8 00:30:47 PDT 2007
On Fri, 2007-04-06 at 23:49 -0700, Ettore Pasquini wrote:
> Hmm, closed source plugins for an open source app... Doesn't that sound
> weird, at best? If you really want it to be approved by LL and the
> community, you really need to explain what advantages a closed source plugin
> architecture would bring over an open source one. And write it of course.
Err, the plugin architecture would kind of have to be open source. It
would be in the viewer. His intention is for an open source plugin
system that closed source plugins could plug in to. The GPL expressly
forbids this. Unless you negotiate a commercial license with Linden Lab,
its a license violation. I don't think Linden Lab's intentions could be
any clearer about this.
I'm still wondering what the hell his wonderful plugin is that the GPL
is apparently preventing him from developing. Hell, does anyone but Dale
have any idea what actual use a plugin architecture would have? IMHO
something like Dale's scanner should be core functionality anyway,
except for maybe his rating system...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/sldev/attachments/20070408/859dfc23/attachment.pgp
More information about the SLDev
mailing list