This plugin is currently licensed under a GPL license. Eclipse does not allow any plugins to be GPL or any kind of GPL.
So this means that none at all are allowed to use this plugin.
So a change of the GPL license are required. The new EPL license would be preferred to switch to.
So until a change in the license has been performed noon are allowed to use this plugin, not even the developer of the plugin.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
There are a few problems with your post. First and foremost what was the goal? This feels very attack heavy, of course I am sure you didn't mean it that way, but I don't know what you would like to happen by enlightening us of this situation.
Second, the code is licensed under the LGPL not GPL. The first L is actually very important.
Third, according to the link you provided and additional investigation the RCP version of the application may not meet licensing requirements. The Plugin on the other hand does. From the linked site "... you may not combine EPL and GPL code in any scenario where source code under those licenses are both the same source code module." But SQLExplorer is not distributed with or by Eclipse when it is a plugin. Therefore LGPL is still a valid license when distributed externally of the Eclipse projects and does not modify anything that is not defined as an public interface.
Fourth, "So until a change in the license has been performed noon are allowed to use this plugin, not even the developer of the plugin." is completely incorrect. Licenses only apply to rights upon distribution. I can do anything i want to my private version of Eclipse. There are only limitations as to what I am allowed to give others
With this new information I guess the question is what to do about the RCP version of this application?
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
on #30 (same link as above) you can see that LGPL is not allowed either.
This is not an attack for your project, your project is probably really great(at least it looks great from the page). The problem is that Eclipse does not allow GPL or any kind of GPL like LGPL to be used together with eclipse so I can not even test it in a legal way.
This is just not true. You can use this plugin fine in any install of
eclipse. Gpl or lgpl means that you can't link / compile against it. But
that is not what you do. You use it and the source code is their to
download and ship.
Maybe what can't be done is to really ship it with a pre package eclipse
rcp bundle/app. This is all ways a bit fuzzy in my eyes.
But the solution top that, and that's what we do, is to include the update
url. So that people can install it very easy themselfs.
On 9 Jul 2013 09:07, "Kalle Jansson" kalle98@users.sf.net wrote:
on #30 (same link as above) you can see that LGPL is not allowed either.
This is not an attack for your project, your project is probably really
great(at least it looks great from the page). The problem is that Eclipse
does not allow GPL or any kind of GPL like LGPL to be used together with
eclipse so I can not even test it in a legal way.
IBM don´t have GPL license in their eclipse products, the problem is only GPL/LGPL.
from your link: "You may not link GPL and EPL code together and distribute the result"
And that is what you sqlexplorer does. You can not give any files to anyone without distribute it, through update sites or download link or whatever.
The EPL license was created to make it possible to make commercial eclipse plugins/products, the only problem was that GPL and LGPL no longer could be used.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
No you have to read better, even eclipse market place! have (l)gpl plugins!
But they can't be shipped together as one eclipse product/installer. But
for an end user it is no problem to install any of these plugins.
The same I think hold true for for example subclipse svn plugin. That one
is also not fully gpl because the need to ship binaries that had other
licenses. That's why there is no direct integration of svn with eclipse.
You always have to download 3th party stuff
On 9 Jul 2013 15:35, "Kalle Jansson" kalle98@users.sf.net wrote:
IBM don´t have GPL license in their eclipse products, the problem is only
GPL/LGPL.
from your link: "You may not link GPL and EPL code together and distribute
the result"
And that is what you sqlexplorer does. You can not give any files to
anyone without distribute it, through update sites or download link or
whatever.
The EPL license was created to make it possible to make commercial eclipse
plugins/products, the only problem was that GPL and LGPL no longer could be
used.
This plugin is currently licensed under a GPL license. Eclipse does not allow any plugins to be GPL or any kind of GPL.
So this means that none at all are allowed to use this plugin.
You can read more about this here for example (32):
http://www.eclipse.org/legal/eplfaq.php#GPLCOMPATIBLE
So a change of the GPL license are required. The new EPL license would be preferred to switch to.
So until a change in the license has been performed noon are allowed to use this plugin, not even the developer of the plugin.
There are a few problems with your post. First and foremost what was the goal? This feels very attack heavy, of course I am sure you didn't mean it that way, but I don't know what you would like to happen by enlightening us of this situation.
Second, the code is licensed under the LGPL not GPL. The first L is actually very important.
Third, according to the link you provided and additional investigation the RCP version of the application may not meet licensing requirements. The Plugin on the other hand does. From the linked site "... you may not combine EPL and GPL code in any scenario where source code under those licenses are both the same source code module." But SQLExplorer is not distributed with or by Eclipse when it is a plugin. Therefore LGPL is still a valid license when distributed externally of the Eclipse projects and does not modify anything that is not defined as an public interface.
Fourth, "So until a change in the license has been performed noon are allowed to use this plugin, not even the developer of the plugin." is completely incorrect. Licenses only apply to rights upon distribution. I can do anything i want to my private version of Eclipse. There are only limitations as to what I am allowed to give others
With this new information I guess the question is what to do about the RCP version of this application?
on #30 (same link as above) you can see that LGPL is not allowed either.
This is not an attack for your project, your project is probably really great(at least it looks great from the page). The problem is that Eclipse does not allow GPL or any kind of GPL like LGPL to be used together with eclipse so I can not even test it in a legal way.
If you really need to release a plugin under GPL or LGPL you can do this IF you add an extra permission that you allow your GPL or LGPL plugin to be used toghther with Eclipse.
http://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/using-the-gpl-for-eclipse-plug-ins
Or make it easy and release sqlexplorer under a compatible license described in #30 above.
This is just not true. You can use this plugin fine in any install of
eclipse. Gpl or lgpl means that you can't link / compile against it. But
that is not what you do. You use it and the source code is their to
download and ship.
Maybe what can't be done is to really ship it with a pre package eclipse
rcp bundle/app. This is all ways a bit fuzzy in my eyes.
But the solution top that, and that's what we do, is to include the update
url. So that people can install it very easy themselfs.
On 9 Jul 2013 09:07, "Kalle Jansson" kalle98@users.sf.net wrote:
Sqlexplorer uses code from Eclipse (EPL code) to create its plugin (below an example from sqlexplorer cvs repo)
http://eclipsesql.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/eclipsesql/sqlexplorer/src/org/eclipse/jface/preference/ComboFieldEditor.java?view=markup
and the result at the end is a binary .jar file built from both LGPL and EPL code.
You can build on top of epl with any kind of licence. That's why ibm can
even build pure closed source plugins.
What can't be done is build epl code on top of (l)gpl that's not allowed
because epl is more free then gpl.
But this plugin just builds on top of epl with a lgpl licence. The only
problem we then have is the shipping. That can't be as one thing I think.
http://mmilinkov.wordpress.com/2010/04/06/epl-gpl-commentary/
On 9 Jul 2013 13:09, "Kalle Jansson" kalle98@users.sf.net wrote:
IBM don´t have GPL license in their eclipse products, the problem is only GPL/LGPL.
from your link: "You may not link GPL and EPL code together and distribute the result"
And that is what you sqlexplorer does. You can not give any files to anyone without distribute it, through update sites or download link or whatever.
The EPL license was created to make it possible to make commercial eclipse plugins/products, the only problem was that GPL and LGPL no longer could be used.
No you have to read better, even eclipse market place! have (l)gpl plugins!
But they can't be shipped together as one eclipse product/installer. But
for an end user it is no problem to install any of these plugins.
The same I think hold true for for example subclipse svn plugin. That one
is also not fully gpl because the need to ship binaries that had other
licenses. That's why there is no direct integration of svn with eclipse.
You always have to download 3th party stuff
On 9 Jul 2013 15:35, "Kalle Jansson" kalle98@users.sf.net wrote: