On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 01:22:50PM +1000, Craig Southeren wrote: > On Mon, 3 Apr 2006 20:03:37 -0700 > Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 12:23:09PM +1000, Craig Southeren wrote: > > > > > Because if it is Debian policy to distribute binaries where the source > > > > > code is not guaranteed to be publically available, then yes, I think > > > > > that could be a problem regardless of whether the license is MPL or > > > > > GPL. > > > > > > The source code is guaranteed to be publicly available for as long as > > > > the binary is, but no longer. > > > > > This is in violation of most Open Source licenses. > > > > > For example, the GPL requires source to be available on demand for up to > > > three years after distribution of the binary by electronic means. > > > > False. The GPL requirements are satisfied by making the source code > > available together with the binaries. The FSF has clarified that > > distributing works together on an ftp site satisfies the intent of the GPL's > > requirement of "a medium customarily used for software interchange". > > Sorry, I disagree. > > Section 3 of the GPL states that the source code for a binary-only > distribution must be available on demand for three years.
It's a good thing we're not doing binary-only distribution then. - Matt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
