Yeah been reading up about GPL/VST...
seems Julian @ JUCE basically said its not in their interest to chase this, its good that JUCE is used for lots of open source VSTs etc..
( I dont think many use the reverse engineered headers)
yeah, splitting up your 'modules' as you say, seems be ok , if not in the spirit.
I do get why GPL is as it is, to 'encourage' sharing of complete source trees, but I wonder in these kind of cases if its not counter-productive... its basically all or nothing and its only end-users that loose out... your allowed to share the source for something thats not full gpl , just not publish a binary.
and we are talking 'for free' here, so no talk of someone making money off a derivative product.
... as for the idea it will 'force' companies to release source, that policy doesn't seem to be working with Steinberg
Ive approached Eigenlabs about it - nothing insurmountable, but definitely food for thought.
(as I say for 'developers' its a non issue, they can build the code , gpl cannot stop that - I'm more concerned how to deal with it for musicians who cannot do this for themselves)