Re: Package Pool Proposal
On 6/12, brian moore wrote:
| Not true. Even if the mirror is open to the world, source code on each
| and every mirror is not mandated:
|
| | 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.)
|
| "Hi, we got these binaries from ftp.us.debian.org, and they say that
| if you want the source, you can go to this URL or put this deb-src in
| your sources.list" That is sufficient to meet the terms of the GPL.
|
| Certainly it would be a 'good' thing if source were littering the
| streets, but it is not mandated by the GPL.
No, that's plain wrong. You forgot the (b) clause. Here is the full
section 3:
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:
a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable
source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections
1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
b) 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; or,
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.)
"The offer to distribute corresponding source code" is the *WRITTEN* offer
mentionned in paragraph (b). To clarify things, if you decide to mirror
the binary part of the Debian FTP site which contains both the binary and
the source and if you redistribute those binaries, you have to choose
between alternatives (a) and (b). Since you chose not to mirror the source,
you only have option (b) available, which means that you must distribute the
binaries with a written offer valid for at least three years, etc.
You cannot choose option (c), as you write, since you *MUST* have gotten
a written offer from YOUR distributor ("in accord with Subsection b above").
Reply to: