RPL 1.5 compatibility with GPL 2.0

If it's not ZDoom, it goes here.

RPL 1.5 compatibility with GPL 2.0

Postby DoomRater » Thu Apr 02, 2015 3:02 pm

I've spoken very briefly about DrizzleScript, an open source LSL diaper I decided to work on because it had the framework of nearly everything I wanted functionally. This code is under the RPL 1.5 license.

I'd like to look into OpenCollar source and see what I could learn from how they build plugins around the collar, so that I can moduarlize DrizzleScript somewhat and offer parts that people could include in their own diapers, and make it easier to maintain. OpenCollar is licensed under GPL v2.0.

My question is concerning the compatibility of the licenses. Would I be able to use code and concepts I glean from OpenCollar and implement them into DrizzleScript?
User avatar
DoomRater
Hi, I'm bob.
 
Joined: 28 Jul 2004
Location: WATR HQ
Discord: DoomRater#6308

Re: RPL 1.5 compatibility with GPL 2.0

Postby Graf Zahl » Thu Apr 02, 2015 4:45 pm

Google referred me to this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reciprocal_Public_License

which says 'no'.
User avatar
Graf Zahl
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
 
Joined: 19 Jul 2003
Location: Germany

Re: RPL 1.5 compatibility with GPL 2.0

Postby DoomRater » Thu Apr 02, 2015 6:18 pm

Okay that's a bit more descriptive than just reading the licenses apart from each other. Just to make sure, what's specifically incompatible which makes GPL code impossible to use in RPL? It definitely seems impossible to go the other way, but something tells me it has to do with the resulting license that the code has to be used under. Since both seem to be locked into their own licenses...
User avatar
DoomRater
Hi, I'm bob.
 
Joined: 28 Jul 2004
Location: WATR HQ
Discord: DoomRater#6308

Re: RPL 1.5 compatibility with GPL 2.0

Postby Graf Zahl » Fri Apr 03, 2015 2:11 am

The GPL is rather unique in that it demands that all code linked to GPL'd code must be able adhere to *ALL* terms and conditions of the GPL itself, even if it isn't licensed under the GPL itself. So any further requirement by some other license - and that's whatÄs present here - would create an incompatibility. (What some people call the 'vampire clause' because it implicitly relicenses all this other code just by being linked to the GPL.)

This other code may be licensed more liberally, but never more restrictively.
User avatar
Graf Zahl
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
Lead GZDoom+Raze Developer
 
Joined: 19 Jul 2003
Location: Germany


Return to Off-Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: invictius and 1 guest