[darcs-users] how to redistribute darcs+Eclipse

[Max Battcher]

zooko at zooko.com wrote:
>  Thomas Zander wrote:
> 
>>Yeah; thats a really big problem; plugins for CVS and SVN have the same
>>problem since they have the same licensing.
> 
> 
> Actually, SVN is under a permissive license so it doesn't have this problem.  
> 
> However, I take your point that even with the current licensing constraint, 
> integration of darcs and Eclipse is not too difficult -- it can proceed by 
> having darcs shipped separately from Eclipse and then hooked up (by cmdline or 
> by C linkage) by the end user himself.

I don't see what the problem is then.  You can have the CPL plugin and 
GPL Darcs in the same zip file.  You don't need to relicense anything to 
do that.  I would assume the plugin author decided not to distribute 
darcs with the plugin to keep from having to release a new one with each 
new darcs release, not because of any licensing issues.

(By the way, even dynamic C linkage is subject to the GPL.)

> My concern is more that I want to allow people in the future to create new
> tools -- currently not conceived of -- by combining darcs code with CPL'ed
> code.

Honestly, I thought that was the whole point of the Unix and GNU 
approach to the matter.  If you want to use Darcs' functionality you 
either bundle it and call it from the command line or you release your 
own code GPL.

The only example I see here that makes any sense is your mention of 
Eclipse, but that really doesn't sound like reason enough.  The only 
reason you can't build an Eclipse plugin under the GPL is only because 
IBM is worried about potential copyleft contamination as they still have 
closed source Eclipse-based products that they (try to) sell.  They just 
worry about being sued for -stealing- distributing your plugin and then 
having to open up the code that really matters to them and which they 
keep hidden, once the GPL has infiltrated their code.  As much as IBM 
pretends to care about Open Source, they are no better than Microsoft at 
the moment.

Not to mention, there is no need for Darcs code in the plugin in the 
first place!  The plugin should do what everyone else (writing tools 
for/with darcs) is doing and use Darcs as a command line tool.  What's 
good enough for the gander should be plenty for the goose, no?

If/when a Darcs API is finalized, I can understand clammering for it to 
be released LGPL, and I believe that having an LGPL API wrapping a GPL 
core is done easy enough.  But, I haven't heard a good reason to weaken 
the current GPLed Darcs code.

-- 
--Max Battcher--
http://www.worldmaker.net/
The WorldMaker.Network: Support Open/Free Mythoi.  Read the manifesto @ 
mythoi.com