[OT] open-source license issues

["Jérôme M. Berger"]

Daniel Gibson wrote:
> Am 12.04.2011 20:11, schrieb "Jérôme M. Berger":
>> Daniel Gibson wrote:
>>> Am 12.04.2011 12:45, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:
>>>> Actually, because of that, I could likely be enticed by an (L)GPL-like 
>>>> license if it was actually readable like zlib, BSD, or MIT, and easier for 
>>>> users/developers to comply with.
>>>>
>>> Even though the GPL isn't easy to read I think it's not too hard to
>>> comply with (at least v2). Basically it's "release the source of your
>>> changes, don't mix in source from incompatible licenses and don't delete
>> the original authors from the GPL headers"
>>
>> 	Not quite: you not only have to release the source of *your*
>> changes, but you also have to distribute the *whole* source (whether
>> you made any changes or not).
>>
>> 		Jerome
> 
> If you don't change the source a link to the project homepage should
> suffice.
> And a link to the original source + your patch should be ok as well.

	Only as a tolerance for free projects, commercial projects must
redistribute the whole source.

		Jerome
-- 
mailto:jeberger at free.fr
http://jeberger.free.fr
Jabber: jeberger at jabber.fr

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20110413/b27ecdd0/attachment.pgp>