> -----Original Message----- > From: Herbert Valerio Riedel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, April 13, 2002 7:17 PM
> > 4) mention the availability of the source code for libraries > > used to create their windows port somewhere on their > > webpage (not strictly necessary, but what's the point of > > 1 -- 3 if you don't advertise it?) Just a note (for Chuck). I'm pretty sure that it is a corollary of the GPL that the source be advertised - along with the specific licence being offered. > > VCDImager project: seems mostly compliant; need a reminder to > > include also OTHER source code (zlib, libxml) > [..] > > will do so; > > btw, I do this just for the unstable series; as soon as the official > stable series come out, they'll lack the .dll's > > btw2: libxml2 was provided in source, I just happen to have deleted it > by accident I wonder if you are aware that cygwin has libxml2 in the distribution now - you can link to the .dll for your unstable series as well, should you desire. > ps: just wondering, which personal interest do you have, that others > (we) comply to the terms? -- plz don't see this question as personal > attack or something alike. I can't speak for Chuck, but I think he's got a similar feeling to me. My interest in seeing the GPL followed is threefold. 1) If the GPL loses the 'threat' power it has now, it will take a test case to reinstate that. 2) In my opinion it's the Right Thing to do - to make the source directly available instead of hoping that someone else has it available. 3) While the GPL is not perfect it's the licence I choose to do the bulk of my development under, and I've contributed quite a few hours of 'free' work to Cygwin - I don't like to see that abused without credit being given. I really appreciate your quick and friendly response to Chucks email though - good one! Cheers, Rob -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
