Licencing policy for gdb Python plugins

Licencing policy for gdb Python plugins

[Joachim Protze]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 457 bytes --]

Hi,

while the discussion in the last session of the GNU cauldron, the
question raised, whether there is a licencing policy for Python plugins,
as there is a quite strict policy for gcc plugins. As no one in the
audience had an opinion to this question, I think the gdb developers
attended the other track. Searching the wiki, the mailinglist and the
web I did not find any hints for a policy. Is there any policy or
recommendation?

- Joachim


[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 5319 bytes --]

Re: Licencing policy for gdb Python plugins

[Stan Shebs]

On 7/10/12 3:33 PM, Joachim Protze wrote:
> Hi,
>
> while the discussion in the last session of the GNU cauldron, the
> question raised, whether there is a licencing policy for Python plugins,
> as there is a quite strict policy for gcc plugins. As no one in the
> audience had an opinion to this question, I think the gdb developers
> attended the other track. Searching the wiki, the mailinglist and the
> web I did not find any hints for a policy. Is there any policy or
> recommendation?
>

Sorry, some of us were off in a different room and didn't notice the time!

In any case, I don't recall much thought about a GDB plugin licensing 
policy, but I imagine there would have to be a pretty strong rationale 
for it to differ from the GCC policy.

Stan Shebs
stan@codesourcery.com

Re: Licencing policy for gdb Python plugins

[Daniel Jacobowitz]

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 10:18 AM, Stan Shebs <stanshebs@earthlink.net> wrote:
> On 7/10/12 3:33 PM, Joachim Protze wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> while the discussion in the last session of the GNU cauldron, the
>> question raised, whether there is a licencing policy for Python plugins,
>> as there is a quite strict policy for gcc plugins. As no one in the
>> audience had an opinion to this question, I think the gdb developers
>> attended the other track. Searching the wiki, the mailinglist and the
>> web I did not find any hints for a policy. Is there any policy or
>> recommendation?
>>
>
> Sorry, some of us were off in a different room and didn't notice the time!
>
> In any case, I don't recall much thought about a GDB plugin licensing
> policy, but I imagine there would have to be a pretty strong rationale for
> it to differ from the GCC policy.

Well, the GCC policy is very compiler-specific and frankly ugly; it is
designed to prevent use of the GPL'd frontend with a non-GPL backend
inserted as a "plugin", or third-party non-GPL optimizers.  It does
this by means of clauses in the libgcc and other runtime licenses,
which can only be used as GPL if a non-GPL plugin was used to produce
the compiler output, preventing the compilation of proprietary
software.  (That's how I remember it anyway - check primary sources).

I'd rather see something looser for GDB, where plugins are more
consumers than contributors, but I haven't thought about it that much.

>
> Stan Shebs
> stan@codesourcery.com
>



-- 
Thanks,
Daniel

Re: Licencing policy for gdb Python plugins

[John Gilmore]

Since we aren't sure, howabout publishing something that says, "If
your plugin is public domain or licensed under GPLv3+, it's compatible
with GDB's licensing.  If you want to do something different, come
talk with us and we'll work something out."  That way we can make a
decision in a context that's informed by an actual plugin - while
enabling anybody who doesn't mind PD or GPL.

	John

Re: Licencing policy for gdb Python plugins

[Frank Ch. Eigler]

Joachim Protze <joachim.protze@tu-dresden.de> writes:

> [...]  while the discussion in the last session of the GNU cauldron,
> the question raised, whether there is a licencing policy for Python
> plugins, [...]

Unless one believes the gdb plugin api is copyrightable in its own
right (and thus license compatibility comes up), perhaps discussion
should be limited to how the gdb project would accept said plugins as
a contribution.


- FChE

Re: Licencing policy for gdb Python plugins

[Doug Evans]

On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Frank Ch. Eigler <fche@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Joachim Protze <joachim.protze@tu-dresden.de> writes:
>
>> [...]  while the discussion in the last session of the GNU cauldron,
>> the question raised, whether there is a licencing policy for Python
>> plugins, [...]
>
> Unless one believes the gdb plugin api is copyrightable in its own
> right (and thus license compatibility comes up), perhaps discussion
> should be limited to how the gdb project would accept said plugins as
> a contribution.

Hi.
Yeah, I'm not sure how else to interpret the discussion.