[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Savannah-hackers-public] News: Licenses clarification

From: Sylvain Beucler
Subject: Re: [Savannah-hackers-public] News: Licenses clarification
Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2006 21:09:14 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060126

On Sun, Feb 26, 2006 at 10:55:44PM -0800, Walter Landry wrote:
> Sylvain Beucler <address@hidden> wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 12:09:53PM -0800, Walter Landry wrote:
> > >   2) This runs afoul of section 2 of the GPL, the relevant part of which 
> > > is
> > > 
> > >        But when you distribute the same sections as part of a whole
> > >        which is a work based on the Program, the distribution of the
> > >        whole must be on the terms of this License, whose permissions
> > >        for other licensees extend to the entire whole, and thus to
> > >        each and every part regardless of who wrote it.
> > 
> > When you have an application display an image, the image need not be
> > released under a license compatible with the application's. I'm pretty
> > sure it is the same case for displaying bits of documentation.
> The difference between incorporating the text directly into the
> program and reading it at runtime is precisely the difference between
> static and dynamic linking.  It makes no difference to the GPL.

I do not think this is the case; if it were true, all code managed
using ArX would have to be covered by the GNU GPL as well.

That is not linking, that is data processing.

> > >   3) Unnecessary licenses conflicts are determining technical details.
> > 
> > 
> > I understand those concerns.
> > 
> > I apologize for entering a "Why do you use the GNU GPL" debate, this
> > was actually a bit off-topic. The real question is: would you mind
> > dual-licensing your manual, to fit both your concerns and ours?
> I will only use the same license for documentation and code.  Everyone
> agrees that the GFDL is not a free license when applied to code.  So
> no, I will not dual license the manual.
> > If that is not an option for you, we will ask you to host the manual
> > at another place.
> Are you really going to kick me off of Savannah because I only use the

I say that you cannot host the _manual_ at Savannah if there is no way
to use it under the GFDL (optionaly in addition to other licenses).


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]