1 |
On Wed, 28 Jun 2006 11:21:45 +0200 |
2 |
Mivz <mivz@×××××××××××××.net> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> Does this obligation, to provide your own source, also count for a |
5 |
> none Gentoo developer making a overlay tree for one of his projects |
6 |
> which is licensed under de GPL-2? |
7 |
|
8 |
If your project is licensed under the GPL-2, you have to honour the |
9 |
provisions of that license. You can't license something under the GPL |
10 |
and not provide the source. |
11 |
|
12 |
If you're distributing binary packages, you need to distribute also the |
13 |
source code that went to make up those binary packages (i.e. your |
14 |
changes/additions and also both upstream sources). |
15 |
|
16 |
If you're only distributing source code (e.g. ebuild scripts, patch |
17 |
files) then there's nothing further you need to do. |
18 |
|
19 |
> Would that mean that, if u write software using the portage system, |
20 |
> that every package that is used by one of your own should be |
21 |
> available from a server of your own? |
22 |
|
23 |
You need to provide the source for all binaries you distribute. |
24 |
|
25 |
> If, the developer should also provide it's own file server with all |
26 |
> those packages, this would cause that every developer that wanted to |
27 |
> make a overlay should be a Gentoo file mirror? |
28 |
|
29 |
Only if they distribute binaries, in which case source should be |
30 |
provided sufficient to build those binaries. |
31 |
|
32 |
> Do my senses run wilde? Your just my imagination? |
33 |
> Do I understand this right? |
34 |
|
35 |
If you're not sure whether something you do is compliant with the |
36 |
relevant licenses, talk to an appropriate lawyer. |
37 |
|
38 |
-- |
39 |
Kevin F. Quinn |