Understanding the License Indication for Your Own Wordpress Plugin

Asked 5 months ago, Updated 5 months ago, 17 views

This time, I modified the SDK published in Apache License 2.0, and created a wordpress plugin, so I am trying to publish it.
So I have a question.

Apache License 2.0

You may reproduce or distribute copies of deliverables or their derivative deliverables, whether in source or object formats, as long as they meet all of the following conditions:

But I don't know exactly what to do.

Of the three files I created this time, two were copied exactly as they were originally published, and I made a completely new file without copying just one.

In this case, if you select LISENCE=>Apache License 2.0 at the time of creation to give it to GitHub,

LISENCE files that can be
Copyright [yyyy] [name of copyright owner]

Enter the information of the original author.

At the beginning of the code on the wordpress plugin side

 * Plugin Name: xxxxxxxx
 * Plugin URI: xxxxxx(github url)
 * Description: xxxxxxxx
 * Version: 0.1
 * Author: xxxxxxx
 * Author URI:xxxxxx
 * licenses:Apache License 2.0
 * Text Domain: xxxxx
 * Domain Path: xxxxxxx

Is this enough?
Is there anything else I should write about?

wordpress license

2022-09-30 14:15

1 Answers

The WordPress plug-in must, in principle, be licensed with GPLv2 or later as a plug-in is recommended.(ex Reference)
Apache License 2.0 is compatible with GPLv3, so you can redistribute the SDK with the GPLv3 plug-in code.

(However, it shouldn't be a problem to use Apache License for plug-ins, as stated in License Guidelines……)

The main body of the plug-in (although it is a derivative) should be a self-created part, not an SDK, so the LICENSE file and header should include the plugin license.

If the original license is specified in the SDK code in comments, you may not need to do anything more, but if the SDK you use contains a file indicating other licenses, you may want to include it.(In that case, it would be easier to understand if you put the SDK in a subdirectory and put those files in the same hierarchy.)

Otherwise, there should be no problem if the SDK part license is specified in some way (such as including a license file or adding comments above) so that plug-in users can access the license information.

I'm starting to feel suspicious that I wrote a little bit in the middle...

2022-09-30 14:15

If you have any answers or tips

© 2023 OneMinuteCode. All rights reserved.