bssc limitations for dll creation

Hi,

As some of you may know Blitzmax is able to create dlls out of bmx code. Now I'm a bit curious about the Blitz shared Source Code Licence provided with Bmax.



If I interpret this correctly then I'm not allowed to publish any dll created with Blitzmax which uses a brl scoped module?
Well it is nearly impossible to write a dll without brl stuff (brl.basic etc.) And as I couldn't find any official statement I ask here for an official answer to this question.

Why do I ask?
At first I want to use minib3d with other languages or let others use minib3d with different languages. Also it may make it possible to create dlls for B3D or B+ like the released XNET lib which is already ready for B3D and B+ but hangs on the line till this situation is cleared.
Maybe a modification could be done so that the license allows us to distribute dlls. As far as I remember the license was created in a time where Blitzmax wasn't able to create dlls and it should prevent people to provide wrappers like the ones done with B3D.

Mark please reply and give a clear statement how to handle this.

thx in advance

klepto2

Well I know I'm not the mark you mean.. but that clause is probably to prevent people distributing a form of BlitzMax for free via dlls. The "in part" bit is to stop someone from spliting say brl.basic into two parts basic1 and basic2 to by-pass the clause. I doubt it applies to people writing their own dll using brl modules.

In that case, every time you compile anything you are using at least one brl module (brl.blitz).

This part directly covers static or dynamic libs so no problem with every compilation ;), but in general thats the reason I ask for clearification.
The problem is because you don't even need to export any brl function but as soon as you use it in your source eg even a simple array you apply to the terms of the license and thats what i find a bit restrictive.
I can understand that exporting whole functions simply wrapped are a no go, but limiting already for the use of these functions even if they are not exported is , as said above, a bit too restrictive.

Why giving the possibilty to create dlls if noone can use this feature.
Maybe there is a license you can obtain seperatly but who knows exactly?
So only Mark is able to respond this and give a correct answer.

Noel asked this on the forum once before, and was asked to email to get information on an appropriate license.

Unfortunatly he didn't received an answer. Also maybe with the new way mark will do his things (more open source etc) he could change this.

Unfortunately we probably wont get an answer aswell.

Surely if you use a module, you're not using the "source code" but just the compiled binaries and thus aren't breaking the license terms?

Edit: nevermind, I'm tired.