Le 8/26/13 3:26 PM, Ian Cordasco a écrit :
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 7:50 AM, Sylvain Thénault <sylvain.thenault@logilab.fr> wrote:
On 25 août 09:36, afayolle wrote:
Yeah that's an issue indeed. I would like to stick with a BSD-like licence Well, changing the license of a piece of code such as Pylint may not be
On mer. 17 juil. 2013 12:24:46 CEST, Tarek Ziadé wrote: that easy... There are several different contributors involved, and I'm not certain where main contributors (Logilab / Sylvain) stand on this. Logilab and I prefer to stick to the GPL mostly for philosophical reasons. If it stands to be a limitation to Pylint usage and development, we may change our mind. That being said, as pointed by Alexandre, there as been a lot of contributors to Pylint for the last 10 years, so even if we (Logilab) decided to change the license, it would take some time to do it properly by asking for approval from the main contributors (supposing they would agree on the licence change). I could be entirely wrong here but I think we would be "safe" if we were to keep this as a plugin. Consider the fact that the plugin registers itself with Flake8 upon installation and Flake8 blindly imports it at run-time. With that in mind, we're never explicitly doing anything like `from pylint import (...)` or `from flake8_pylint import (...)` so we're never using the API of either per se. Since we're never actually doing that, I think we're exempt from the GPL's restrictions. The plugin, however, would have to be licensed under the GPL (or another license in the GPL's family).
Again, I could be completely wrong, so don't take the above blindly as truth. My memory could very well be faulty at this early of an hour.
We can also ask the FSF what's the best practice here I guess. Plugins vs CLI calls sound like quite an edge case
_______________________________________________ code-quality mailing list code-quality@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/code-quality