On Friday 04 November 2005 14.33, John Hasler wrote: > Wouter Verhelst writes: > > Any *distributed* changes to foo.c must be contributed back to the > > community. > > That's not true either. Any distributed changes must be made available > to those to whom the changes were distributed. In practice changes > usually become available to the community but that is not required. ... and it is also not required to make the changes available in a useable form. (/me remembers some Montavista hacked gcc for some embedded platform: I tried to forward port their modification once, but gave up because all they distributed was the complete toolchain source with no indication what upstream version, exactly, it was based on[1]. Legally ok, to the letter of the GPL, but totally useless beecause isolating Montavista's work was virtually impossible. I'm not picking on MV specifically here, it's just a good example from personal experience.) [1] nontrivial - I concluded that it must have been a CVS snapshot with some additional upstream patches applied. -- vbi -- Could this mail be a fake? (Answer: No! - http://fortytwo.ch/gpg/intro)
Attachment:
pgpi6ApQJfAJI.pgp
Description: PGP signature