125 replies to this topic

[Taykun345]

wow, webinterface? Thats a problem. Hope there will be .ipk file available for users.

[andyblac]

you're quoting the gpl license (which is the license under which we release the sourcecode of our OpenPLi image)
But Dr.Best and reichi are refering to software they released under a different (i.e. Creative Commons) license.

what license is Enigma2 released under ?, if that is GPL then the same license apply ?

[VU+NL]

you're quoting the gpl license (which is the license under which we release the sourcecode of our OpenPLi image)
But Dr.Best and reichi are refering to software they released under a different (i.e. Creative Commons) license.

What license is Enigma2 released under? If that is GPL then the same license apply?

So any plugin has to use the same license as the core program IE Enigma2, and the is GPL open source..........

[andyblac]

got this the answer from here


License
Enigma2 has a dual license, with the option for the user to fork a GPL2-licensed version. Details can be found [highlight=initial]here[/highlight] and [highlight=initial]here[/highlight].

[andyblac]

so it looks like it is upto the plugin maker what license there plugin should use, but if they choose not the use GLP forked version, it means that the plugin can NOT be use on a GPL licensed version of enigma2, like Pli, ViX, BlackHole, VTI, etc etc use.

so it looks like we all have to remove the plugin from these boxes, that run GPL licensed version of Enigma2.

[Mamba0815]

The plugins have their own license and therefore do not necessarily depend on the E2 license.

[1701d]

http://git.opendream...CENSE;hb=masterThe plugins have their own license and therefore do not necessarily depend on the E2 license.

Yes, but they have to be licensed unter the GPL. as quoted above:

It depends on how the program invokes its plug-ins. If the program uses fork and exec to invoke plug-ins, then the plug-ins are separate programs, so the license for the main program makes no requirements for them.If the program dynamically links plug-ins, and they make function calls to each other and share data structures, we believe they form a single program, which must be treated as an extension of both the main program and the plug-ins. This means the plug-ins must be released under the GPL or a GPL-compatible free software license, and that the terms of the GPL must be followed when those plug-ins are distributed.

As the most Enigma2 Plugins do "make function calls to each other and share data structures", they have to be (IMHO) licensed under the GPL. That means, they should be removed from every E2 Fork and are only allowed to run on the original DMM Image which is not licensed under GPL.

Kind regards

Klaus

[Mamba0815]

Good point.

If an extension to E2 is formed our of a plugin and a daemon and if the plugin only serves as a front-end to a daemon (i.e. communication via a socket), would the daemon be forced to be released under GPL?

[andyblac]

Good point.

If an extension to E2 is formed our of a plugin and a daemon and if the plugin only serves as a front-end to a daemon (i.e. communication via a socket), would the daemon be forced to be released under GPL?

your missing the point. all a plugin is, is a collection of Enigma2 commands (or other python modules) and imported and run a particular way to make more functionality.

if the plugin could run stand alone then it could have/use it own license and not be part of GPL, but if we use a GPL variant of enigma2 EVERY plugin that use ANY part of that code HAS to use the same GPL license.

and what he is saying is that his plugin is not licensed to be used on the GPL variant of Enigma2, which is his choice.

[Mamba0815]

Hi,

I believe I am getting the point.

My question was targeting a special configuration where the "plugin" is only a front-end within E2, while the main part (a daemon) of the extension is outside E2. In this case, I can't image the daemon, which comes with the plugin in a ipk package, has to be released under GPL. I understand the plugin may have to be released under GPL, should it run under the GPL fork.

In other words: what is a "plugin"? Where are the boundaries?

I think: only the thingy that runs "inside" the GUI is the plugin. Anything outside the GUI, namely all elements of the userspace of Linux, has nothing to do with the E2 proprietary license. Am I right? If so, I have to have two licenses within my ipkg package?

Well, now I am really missing the point, I guess.

Mamba

[Jeroensky]

Since this topic has to do with all GPl licensed Enigma2 images, I also inform/post on IHAD forum.
Let's see how they reply. (maybe they got a solution we didn't think about)

[Dr.Best]

Of course we respect the wishes of plugin writers.

Thank you, pieterg.

[Pheonix]

This is absolute crap but we must obey his wishes if he has the licenses as he states, The main thing i will personally miss and the one that will make the biggest difference is the web interface. now i'm not claiming to understand even a quarter of this but i do believe that this will end up leaving us the satellite community in a stronger position as teams work together to make their own better alternatives to his plugins. This action may hurt teams in the short run bun in the longer term he is doing us a favor and we will not be held to ransom by him any longer.

[buyukbang]

Don't worry people,

ipk files will be always out of there. Even without sources cracking software is not so hard. But we have sources! So just follow legal steps and leave other things to the underworld...

[VU+NL]

......but i do believe that this will end up leaving us the satellite community in a stronger position as teams work together to make their own better alternatives to his plugins. This action may hurt teams in the short run bun in the longer term he is doing us a favour and we will not be held to ransom by him any longer.

I think you're absolutely right there. In the end that will mean that the DM-side will become smaller and weaker, and that "the other side" will get the lead.
So the winner is...........!

[Jeroensky]

So. Nowwe know the issue here.

let's think aboutthe alternatives.

OpenPli team, is their already a webinterface alternative? (yeah, just a joke /images/smiley/more_teasing/12.gif )

The streaming interface uses the webinterface(webcontrol).
Is the Android plugin Dreamdroid also depending on webcontrol? (assuming webcontrol/webinterface is the same plugin).
Maybe we can use a strip down version of Apache?
For mytube we already have a alternative in the feed.

It would be much more easy for us endusers if the topicstarter just givethe names of the plugins that break the license.

So let's think about the alternatives for the license breaking plugins.
And respect the OpenPli developers more, because i think they got a little bit more pressure on their work.

Maybe gpl licensed enigma2 image builders can work together, to make a fantastic alternative.

[VU+NL]

Maybe gpl licensed enigma2 image builders can work together, to make a fantastic alternative.

That certainly would be the very best way: that way "we" end-up much stronger then the DM-related party's who will just fade away in no-time.....

And all this because "Dr." Best is not a DM-puppet (you noticed he even closed his Blog....?) and only wants the best for our hobby!.

[Jeroensky]

Since this topic has to do with all GPl licensed Enigma2 images, I also inform/post on IHAD forum.
Let's see how they reply. (maybe they got a solution we didn't think about)

IHAD locked the topic as you see.
Let's see what LT say about it. /images/smiley/more_thinking/3.gif
(I'm just curious how other image builders react, maybe they can work together in creating alternatives for non GPL licensed work.)

[Jeroensky]

You know what i don't get...
I thought Newnigma2 image was GPL licensed?
But on their forum i see Dr.Best with one of his plugin.
So Newnigma2 is not GPL licensed?

[reichi]

http://openpli.git.s...4d55e6cea709f0f

THIS commit ist just ridiculous and still as license violation as the patch you applied before!
And everyone who understands what it's technically all about (with tpm) knows why...

That's really poor. And i am very sure you know what I am talking about (@milo/pieterg).