General TC > General TC Talk

Discussion on GPL v2 as used by TCL

(1/4) > >>

SvOlli:
Hello!

Some weeks ago, I set up a small web page with some additions to TinyCoreLinux. I discovered that GRUB4DOS is a more suitable bootloader, and wanted to add this to some other work I did a while ago, that added NTFS support to TCL during boot time, allowing to install TCL "inside" a Windows System without the need for repartitioning. This lead to a remaster that was automatically generated, based on the latest release and release candidate, which I announced on the boards here, together with the script that created it.

It got removed almost instantly. After some messages back and forth with ^thehatsrule^ it was explained to me, that it got removed because I was violating the GPL v2 for not releasing the source code. My understanding at this time was that pointing out that my remaster was just a simple automated rebuild of TCL with a link back to the original was enough. He explained to me, that in their understanding of the GPL this is not enough, not even pointing out with a direct link to the sources would be enough, but that I have to set up an own mirror of the sources of TCL base.

I did that, even though I am convinced that pointing out to the sources is enough, accoring to chapter 3 c) of the GPL v2:

--- Quote ---3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:
[...]
c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object code or executable form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)
--- End quote ---
I could have even gone for 3 b)

--- Quote ---Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange
--- End quote ---

But after creating the mirror, I was also requested to put up the source code of all the extensions that are included in that image. And that's where the fun stops. The point is reached where I'm requested to do something that TCL does not: TCL does not host the source code of all the extensions that are based on GPL'ed work. I maintain the Qt port to TCL which the TCL team distributes in binary form, and TCL does not offer a mirror of the source code used for compiling this package.

This looks to me like applying double standards. I want to work with you guys, showing my work as a proof of concept for an open discussion, to see if there's anything in it that might be of value for you. But this way it feels like you're working against me. Sorry to say that, but it really does feel that way... :(

curaga:
We do host extension source code, for qt it would be:
http://ftp.nluug.nl/pub/metalab/distributions/tinycorelinux/3.x/tcz/src/qt-4.x/

(3.x/tcz/src on any mirror)


According to my understanding, the 3 c) would imply redistributing without modifications.

I won't comment on the other parts right now.

SvOlli:

--- Quote from: curaga on August 25, 2010, 10:17:24 AM ---We do host extension source code, for qt it would be:
http://ftp.nluug.nl/pub/metalab/distributions/tinycorelinux/3.x/tcz/src/qt-4.x/

(3.x/tcz/src on any mirror)

--- End quote ---

I'm sorry. I stand corrected, but even searching the ibiblio.org mirror with google did not bring that up:
http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aibiblio.org+qt-everywhere-opensource-src-4.6.3&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

curaga:
The link to the extension sources is at the bottom of the extensions web page. I do see it could be more prominent, will add to the top as well.

roberts:
We are not against remasters of Core but trying to comply with the GPL is not easy. I am posting a link to this topic that I was personally, being co-developer of DSL,  involved with at the time.

http://www.linux.com/archive/feature/55285

When I started Tiny Core, I wanted to be sure that GPL sources would be easily available and not have to worry about handling media for such purposes.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page