Re: gpl license definition of distributing

From: Barry S (barry_at_nospam.4.me.thx.com)
Date: 07/24/04

  • Next message: Wang RD: "help : uboot crosscompile problem" 
    Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 23:35:50 -0500

    In article <4100b24a$0$148$edfadb0f@dread11.news.tele.dk>, Martin Hansen wrote:
    > Grant Edwards wrote:
    >> Unless you are going to claim that people prefer to edit source
    >> code while it's in eprom on your HW, distributing the sources
    >> in eprom on your HW does not meet the terms of the GPL.
    > Then you could, with the same argument, claim that a tape does not meet the
    > terms. I don't think anyone edit sources while it is on tape.
    >

    I think that you are getting far too hung up on using obtuse examples
    regarding the meaning of the word 'distributing'

    Very simple: If you write custom code (ie. some PHP/Perl/Python script)
    that acts in conjuction with a GPL product (ie. Apache/Linux et al). You
    are free to choose the license to release that code under.

    Just because your code depends on the functionality of another GPL
    component, you do not need to distribute your code (unless its
    statically linked etc...)

    Only if you modify Apache / Linux kernel would you have to follow the
    GPL requirements.

    Your own custom code can be released under any license you wish...

    Its really not that complicated, although you seem determined to make it
    so ;)

  • Next message: Wang RD: "help : uboot crosscompile problem"