Re: Gitbox

On 04/14/2011 03:55 PM, Martin Langhoff wrote:

On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 9:58 PM, Chris Perkins [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Let's look at this at a slighty different way. Let's say someone writes
a GUI wrapper for Git, bundles it with Git, and then offers for sale a
new proprietary SVC system. They list off all the wonderful features
that it has.  On the back page of their website is a small 'Licenses'
disclosure and the source code to Git comes with the download buried in
a subdirectory.  None of the users realize the software is using Git.

Is that a violation of the GPL? I would say that it absolutely is.

It absolutely is not. Lots of companies do this, and it is perfectly
kosher -- either bundle the src somewhere or offer a link to download
the source somewhere.

While IANAL, and specifically not _your_ lawyer, I have been in this
field for >10 years, and studied law @ masters level on software
licensing. You are reading the GPL wrong, and you're not aware of
widespread industry practices around it.

Anyone who is curious about this gitbox thing, and interested in
*facts* instead of fiction, could advance our knowledge with a simple
procedure:

 - Download the "free" version (or payfor the paid version!). It's a
zipfile, no need to hurt any Macs.

 - See if it includes the src or a link to download the src -- it will
probably be in a corner of the documentation or license. Maybe there's
an offer to provide the src in a different way, but a download link is
the usual trick.

 - Does the link work? Can you effectively get the src?

 - Does the src match the binaries you got?

Excellent answer; it would be great to know in detail what would be an
effective (and efficient, if possible) procedure for validating GPL
compliance. Something like a cartoon guide to the GPL for developers
and/or users. I don't even know if my own GPL'ed projects are within the
letter of the law here.

-- 
Victor

On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 10:15 AM, Victor Engmark
[off-list ref] wrote:

Excellent answer; it would be great to know in detail what would be an
effective (and efficient, if possible) procedure for validating GPL
compliance.

Glad you find it useful. There are some interesting FAQs in FSF's
website. And http://gpl-violations.org/faq/sourcecode-faq.html

Something like a cartoon guide

Both why the lucky stiff and Hunter Thompson would be candidates if
they were still around.


m
-- 
 martin.langhoff@gmail.com
 martin@laptop.org -- Software Architect - OLPC
 - ask interesting questions
 - don't get distracted with shiny stuff  - working code first
 - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff