On Thu, 18 Sep 2008, Arc Riley wrote: > Clearly you cannot escape the terms of the GPL by splitting the work into > different packages, otherwise everyone would do this.
There are many cases where you can, actually. game+working sample data, with more complex data distributed separately is a classical example. Since the GPL does not apply to actual use, and game+working sample data forms a work on its own, there's no problem here. It's the same issue with a standard interface and GPL code; if there's a documented interface, and things that are legitimately separate works can be plugged in, everything is perfectly fine. That said, there's no reason *not* to distribute the data under the same license as the codebase. Finally, please refrain from attacking other people on this list: casting aspersions on others in the process of making an argument makes others less likely to listen to that argument (or even future arguments made) at all. Don Armstrong -- America was far better suited to be the World's Movie Star. The world's tequila-addled pro-league bowler. The world's acerbic bi-polar stand-up comedian. Anything but a somber and tedious nation of socially responsible centurions. -- Bruce Sterling, _Distraction_ p122 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
