Re: 6 GPL'ed Packages that depend on XForms.

[Jonathan P Tomer <jpt@cif.rochester.edu>]

> It't not justifying, it's *specifying*. If it does not say I'm allowed
> to distribute the with-xforms binaries, I cannot do so.
> 
> If it only said,
> 
>   "You can distribute binaries linked with xforms."
> 
> I would be allowed to distribute said binaries without sources, which
> would open a barn door for proprietary exploitation (make some
> modifications, keep them secret, link the modified source with xforms,
> sell the binaries withot disclosing the source modification).
> 
> So the amendment has to specify somehow *when* I can distribute the
> xforms-linked binarues. And its easier just to refer to clause 3 of
> the GPL than re-stating the same conditions in the amendment.

i'm sorry, i wrote without checking what clause 3 was. i thought you meant
the 'major components' hack. apologies; yes, it had probably also ought to
be mentioned, either referencing section 3 or stating "*if* the xforms
linkage is all that's preventing you from distributing it under the gpl"
(except better phrased).

--p.
"For a price I'd do about anything, except pull the trigger: for that I'd
need a pretty good cause" -- Queensryche, "Revolution Calling"
PGP 5.0 key (0xE024447449) at http://cif.rochester.edu/~jpt/pubkey.txt