Re: Possible GPL violation in package distribution
>>>> On 23 Feb 2001 17:26:21 +0100, Hrvoje Niksic
<hniksic(a)arsdigita.com> said:
Hrvoje> James LewisMoss <jimdres(a)mindspring.com> writes:
> OK. I hate to bring this up, but looking at it the person who
> reported this bug to me looks to have a point. Neither the *sumo*
> files nor the *pkg.tar.gz files have the
> scripts/makefiles/whatever to rebuild the .elc files from the .el
> files.
Hrvoje> What's wrong with the good old `M-x byte-recompile-directory'
Hrvoje> once you fix the bug or make the change?
Well in terms of debian packaging that doesn't work, but that's not
the issue. Technically nothing, but the bit of the GPL that says the
dist must include the scripts used to compile the source is what I was
mentioning.
I think it'd be perfectly reasonable for the xemacs developers to
reject this as not a violation of the GPL. I can see both sides, but
I wanted to bring it up in case people did find it a violation it
could be corrected.
Another person brought up that there are source packages available.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only available "source form" is cvs.
Is this not correct?
Jim
--
＠James LewisMoss <dres(a)debian.org> | Blessed Be!
＠ http://jimdres.home.mindspring.com | Linux is kewl!
＠"Argue for your limitations and sure enough, they're yours." Bach