Back to home page

DOS ain't dead

Forum index page

Log in | Register

Search:  
Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view

GPL something (Announce)

posted by ecm Homepage E-mail, Düsseldorf, Germany, 30.05.2011, 17:08

> I think I know the boundaries of the licenses quite well.
It didn't sound like that when I read it. Sorry for misunderstanding what you wrote.

> (Not liking my license choice does
> not give you the right to infer that I don't understand the license.)
Independent of my preferences I have the right to infer whatever I want to infer.

Whether what I infer is true or at least plausible is an entirely different matter.

Whether it appears polite or rude similarly is an entirely different matter.

> > > > For libraries, it is more ensuring that it will be unused :-)
> > >
> > > Instead of making funny little comments, please provide an example where
> > > GPL3 will be an obstacle to this code being used.
Considering this:

> > Linking the code with the application makes the GPL apply to all code
> > linked together therein.
>
> Good - that was intentional.
it should have been obvious to you that the GPL will be an obstacle in two cases:

(a) if some source code's license is incompatible to the GPL, or
(b) if someone doesn't want to tie their source code to the GPL even if possible.

Assuming you thought of both of these when considering the license, I don't understand why you asked for examples where it will be an obstacle.

> Ok, so the obstacle is that if you use my code you have to ship it under
> GPL3. I don't see that as an obstacle.
"So the X is that Y. I don't see that as an X."

Well.

I see it as an X.

More usefully: the obstacle isn't that "if I use your code I have to ship your code under GPL3" (which I personally would often be fine with), it's that "if I use your code I have to ship both your and my code under GPL3". Your statement is ambiguous here but I'll assume you knew what you meant with "it" there.

> If you use mTCP I want you to use GPL3. I don't want people modifying the
> work and distributing it without making the modifications public and under
> the same license that I chose. I don't see that as a bad thing.
Again, "it" is ambiguous. And again if "it" meant just your code I could see myself agreeing with your views a lot more.



However, let's not forget that even a GPL release allows us to read the source code, and use it in some ways. And assuming the binary-only distribution without all the GPL appendage will still be provided on your website, you obviously didn't take away any freedoms with this release. So all in all while I do not agree with your license preference and could probably talk about that forever: It is still accommodating of you to make the source code available and I'm grateful for that. (Presumably. Haven't actually used the source code for anything yet.)

---
l

Post reply
 

Complete thread:

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view
22632 Postings in 2109 Threads, 402 registered users, 372 users online (0 registered, 372 guests)
DOS ain't dead | Admin contact
RSS Feed
powered by my little forum