Inclusion of MXit plugin into Pidgin

Paul Aurich paul at
Wed Aug 5 14:58:20 EDT 2009

And Mark Doliner spoke on 08/05/2009 11:08 AM, saying:
> * We should probably look over your existing code and make sure we're
> comfortable with it.  Like, make sure it doesn't scan the user's hard
> drive for pictures of earthworms, or link against any crazy libraries,
> or break the user's expectations, or have buffer overflows, or crash
> on the 76th second of every Tuesday

I agree with this. There was a report on the support at mailing list
that the plugin pops up some sort of dialog at login, which is unacceptable
to me (it also looks like the plugin uses its own AES implementation, so
I'd like to see that added to the cipher support in purple).

In addition, I tried to download the 'open' protocol documentation, but was
stymied by a registration form that required both a usable MXit account (as
well as my address) and agreeing to terms and conditions
( that I'm not comfortable agreeing to.

Among other things, my reading of that license (IANAL, of course) is that
it's incompatible with the GPL and we wouldn't be able to accept
third-party patches from anyone bound by this license.  Among other things,
there's an advertising clause somewhat similar to the BSD one (see 6c),
although I personally think there are a number of sub-points in sections 6
and 7 that are either unacceptable to me or seem to add further
restrictions to a developed application, rendering it incompatible with the

I admit these complaints are somewhat arbitrary given the set of
proprietary protocols (with their own licenses governing usage) libpurple
currently supports in-tree, so if this isn't an issue for others, I'll
accede to the majority decision.

> I don't feel like a separate branch is necessary, but I have no
> objections to it if that's what people want.

I would prefer a separate branch.

> -Mark


More information about the Devel mailing list