Pore is unlikely to ever get off the drawing board. ShaRose has expressed his opinion recently that a loader for Bukkit plugins won’t be legal to distribute. This disappoints me as much as anyone, but that’s the way it rolls. 
Here’s the blurb from IRC:
<ShaRose> welp, after looking it over I'm entirely convinced there is no legal way to make a legal loader for bukkit plugins
<Hubok> Didn't someone mention loading different .jar files doesn't violate the GPL? Or is it a problem with getting the code to LOAD the Bukkit plugins since it would need to be from Bukkit itself?
<ShaRose> as per fsf's page:
<ShaRose> If the program dynamically links plug-ins, and they make function calls to each other and share data structures, we believe they form a single program, which must be treated as an extension of both the main program and the plug-ins. This means that combination of the GPL-covered plug-in with the non-free main program would violate the GPL. However, you can resolve that legal problem by adding an exception to your plug-in's license, giving permission to link
<ShaRose> it with the non-free main program.
<ShaRose> if you add said exception, it's also illegal since you can't add restrictions so bukkit's gpl would be broken
<Hubok> So, every plugin developer would need to update their plugin with that exception?
<Hubok> Ah
<Unh0ly_Tigg> I would (at class load time), use ASM to modify the plugin code to call your system instead of the bukkit system...
<ShaRose> it'd be a modification, still illegal
<Unh0ly_Tigg> but the only reference to bukkit-specific code would be the class/method names in the transformers
<ShaRose> the only way to do it is to get every single plugin developer and bukkit with all of it's constributors to add that exception
<ShaRose> but if they DID, craftbukkit would be legal again
<ShaRose> and the whole thing would be moot
<ShaRose> still linked
<ShaRose> tl;dr for the previous conversation "hey pore's illegal here's how" "wow that sucks" "yeah gpl is cancer" *brofists all around*