Is it just me, again?

[Richmond]

On 04/13/2013 08:44 AM, Monte Goulding wrote:
> On 13/04/2013, at 9:53 AM, "Cal Horner" <calhorner at xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
>> So, help me get this hypothesis correct then:
>>
>> "I can use anything that is developed in LC OSS within my commercial LC
>> environment. But if there is a password protection on something I have been
>> using for awhile, and wish to continue to use, that plug-in can't be used in
>> a LC OSS development environment."
> Yep, it's only the password protection blocking it. Many plugin developers have already announced dual licenses are forthcoming or already here. Many also never had their stuff protected. There really aren't that many plugin vendors and most of them are on this list. Why not list the plugins that are stressing you out.
>> I can't quite put my finger on it, but it seems something is askew.
> Maybe there's a problem with your finger because it's all quite logical. If runrev open source the password protection stuff then they would be putting all commercial code from the platform at risk.

Here's Richmond's sticky finger!

It would be perfectly possible to have passworded plugins in the plugins 
folder for LC OSS without
the end-user being able to access the password, any more than they could 
access the password on a protected plugin with the commercial version.

There is also no reason why, to do this, RunRev would have to open 
source the password.

>
> --
> Monte Goulding
>
> M E R Goulding - software development services
> mergExt - There's an external for that!
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode