If you code it, distribute it on your own repo and if the users are willing to pay, I don't see why not.
However, that kinda defeats the purpose of a FOSS media center like XBMC and it's add-ons, developed by volunteers around the world.
Dunno about the licensing issues, if any. Just wait for the dev's input.
hudo
I guess the devs have taken the FOSS nature of XBMC in account while developing the Addon Manager. But the provided info is very poor on this matter. But in my opinion, some commercial addons is a lot better than being forked and commercialized like Boxee did...
The addons manager was created so that you could extend XBMC with free/open or closed/proprietary addons. Obviously we like the first and that's what we care the most about, but there may be reasonable circumstances where someone might choose to distribute a closed addon. As an example, a content-provider may wish to allow you to watch their shows in XBMC, but not want the world to see how they're fetched. We have not had anyone approach us with this yet, but we didn't want to rule it out.
We also designed the official repo in such a way that _only_ open-source addons may be added. They don't necessarily have to be GPL (notice most skins are CC), but they do have to be tied to a reasonable open-source license and they _must_ be free for us to distribute.
We do this for several reasons. The main is idyllic obviously. But also, there have been instances in the past where compiled addons (.pyo) have been passed around with no accompanying source. When those break due to external changes, there is no way to fix. If only open-source addons are accepted, this can't happen. Also, if the original author goes awol or can no longer maintain the addon, a new maintainer can take over smoothly.
Hope that clears things up.
TheUni
Thnx for the info.
TheUni draws the picture for software via the official repo quite well: Use a open license or contact teamXBMC for a closed license. But doesn't GPL automaticly kicks in with addons due to the architecture of the addon manager?
If not, than it seems fair to say that unofficial repo's can distribute apps with their preferred license (including closed license)?
Its a tricky business with when GPL spreads or not but in this case it won't since the addon interface is designed seperatly and is just an API. It is ofcourse only true if the actual header used by the addon isn't GPL, then its impossible. Which when I think of it it might be
This is the same that you can make closed source codec addons to gstreamer.
If you make an GPL thing that interacts with closed source its ok if the closed source is not designed to be interacting with the GPL only, i.e. just because samba in xbmc is GPL doesn't mean windows is when we connect to them.
It gets iffy though if you design a closed source app and an open source app that interacts with eachother in such a way that they were designed for eachother, then the closed source app could be seen as should be under GPL. But its iffy.
Thanks. It´s clear that you can create closed source addons and distribute them using your own repo, available in the Addon Manager. Since there is no payment model in the Addon Manager you will need to fork e.g. an other Installer like SVN REPO Installer, XBMC SVN Installer or create one yourself.
Robotica Wrote:Thanks. It´s clear that you can create closed source addons and distribute them using your own repo, available in the Addon Manager. Since there is no payment model in the Addon Manager you will need to fork e.g. an other Installer like SVN REPO Installer, XBMC SVN Installer or create one yourself.
Or you could just use your own repo and use some sort of "activation key" which the user buys via your website and enters into the addon.
The addon could still be installed by the addon manager pointing to your own repo, it would just need the key or password to be use-able.
Not as elegant as being able to pay directly through the addon manager, but it would work...
-Wes
in the my ideal fluffy world, content providers are smrt enough to understand that
1) there's no security in obscurity
2) it's the content they sell - not the code.
thus they can do open-source add-ons, while requiring a login/key/whatever.
we already have two commercial add-ons. the mymovies.dk scraper (ok, you don't have to pay here but you can) and the tvkaista video plugin.
spiff Wrote:in the my ideal fluffy world, content providers are smrt enough to understand that
1) there's no security in obscurity
2) it's the content they sell - not the code.
thus they can do open-source add-ons, while requiring a login/key/whatever.
Maybe one day..... In the meanwhile devs also need to make some money..
But thanks. It´t totally clear now.