Pulp

# Pulp3 Licensing FAQ

### Why would Pulp3 Plugins be affected by the license of the pulpcore-plugin package?

The GPL FAQ states that subclassing as a mechanism is creating a derivative work. https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#OOPLang

Coupled with the fact that the plugin API uses subclassing as a mechanism ( https://docs.pulpproject.org/en/pulpcore-plugin/nightly/plugin-writer/concepts/index.html#subclassing ) plugin code must be a "GPLv2 or later" compatible license.

### GPLv2 or later?

The pulpcore and pulpcore-plugin packages both extend their license to users a "GPLv2 or later".

https://github.com/pulp/pulp/blob/master/COPYRIGHT#L5  

https://github.com/pulp/pulpcore-plugin/blob/master/COPYRIGHT#L5

So a plugin can choose the license they want to use as either GPLv2 or GPLv3.

### Why does the pulpcore package matter? Plugin code is only imported from pulpcore-plugin, not pulpcore?

For technical reasons, many of the objects in pulpcore-plugin are imported and offered from the pulpcore asset itself. There are enough of these cases that offering pulpcore and pulpcore-plugin as separate license types is infeasible.

### Can I combine GPLv2 or GPLv3 licensed code with other license types?

It depends on if the other license is "compatible" with GPLv2 or GPLv3. https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#WhatDoesCompatMean

### Can I combine GPLv2 or GPLv3 licensed code with Apache 2.0 licensed code?

No for GPLv2, Yes for GPLv3.

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#apache2