Re: Possible GPL violation?
On Mon, Jun 14, 1999 at 02:44:53PM +0300, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 14, 1999 at 07:32:40AM -0400, James Mastros wrote:
> > Hey all...
> > As I was looking for somthing completly different, I noticed somthing
> > interesting -- a commercial RCS client/server for Windows (Microsoft, that
> > is), that loudly claims to be based on GNU RCS -- but dosn't have source
> > anywhere obvious. Anybody care to look into it further? It's at
> > http://www.componentsoftware.com/ple.
>
> >From http://www.componentsoftware.com/csrcs/faq/gnu.htm:
>
> Is CS-RCS GPL complaint?
>
> The CS-RCS front-end and GNU RCS are two separate applications that run as
> separate Windows processes. The CS-RCS application is proprietary, but the
> GNU RCS application is distributed under the terms of the GNU GENERAL PUBLIC
> LICENSE (GPL). CS-RCS is not linked with RCS because such linking would
> violate the terms of the GPL. The Free Software Foundation affirms that
> running the two as separate processes, with a clean, well-defined general
> interface between them, justifies the view that they are two separate
> programs.
Thanks for looking into that; I didn't see that when I looked into it first.
(As I said, I didn't have time to look into it -- I noticed their banner ad
whilst looking for somthing else.)
-=- James Mastros
--
First they came for the fourth amendment, but I said nothing because I
wasn't a drug dealer. Then they came for the sixth amendment, but I kept
quiet because I wasn't guilty. Finally they came for the first amendment,
and by then it was too late to say anything at all."
-=- Nancy Lebowitz
cat /dev/urandom|james --insane=yes > http://www.rtweb.net/theorb/
ICQ: 1293899 AIM: theorbtwo YPager: theorbtwo
Reply to: