[consulting] Is this list dead?

[Joakim Stai]

På Tue, 20 Mar 2007 11:36:01 +0100, skrev Michael Haggerty <mhaggerty at trellon.com>:
> Interesting perspective.
>
> While I differ on the effect of market forces on development (from the
> standpoint that truly innovative products are very difficult to 'clone'), I
> agree that entering a market by building it yourself is not a terribly high
> hurdle. And yes, he's planning to release this as a hosted service, so there
> are not GPL issues to worry about.

I'm developing a proprietary specialized extension to Drupal. Initially I wanted to make it a public, GPL licenced module and only charge my customers for the hosting, but having landed a deal with a reseller I was forced to protect my code. The prorietary parts of my code are PHP and JavaScript, which communicate with a custom (public, GPL licened) module in Drupal. Without the proprietary part, the custom module won't do much, but it's not impossible to clone my proprietary code to take advantage of the module. I don't see my reseller doing this however, so in my case it works out fine.

I do have a bad feeling about not contributing directly back to the community, and I would definetely prefer the benefits of an open source community. I want to make my proprietary product into a more generic Drupal module in the future, hoping to benefit from the community while also giving back.

> For the sake of argument, would you consider a theme to be a module under
> this interpretation of the GPL? If not, why?

Check out this interesting discussion on themes, modules and GPL licencing:
http://drupal.org/node/30708


Joakim