[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: One unclear point in the Vim license

On Tue, Jan 01, 2002 at 11:55:20AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> It sounds to me like what you really want to support are two licensing
> schemes; one for people who publicize the source code of their changes
> to Vim, and one for people who don't.  You can do this and still be
> totally DFSG-free, in spirit as well as letter.
>   There are no restrictions on distributing unmodified copies of Vim.
>   You can also distibute parts of Vim, but this license text must always
>   be included.  You are allowed to include executables that you made
>   from the unmodified Vim sources, plus your own usage examples and Vim
>   scripts.
>   You are allowed to distribute a modified version of Vim when either of
>   the following conditions are met:
>   1) You make your changes to the source code available to the general
>      public, or to those to whom you distributed modified versions of
>      Vim, with no restrictions on use, copying, modification, or
>      distribution; or
>   2) You make your changes to the source code available to the Vim
>      maintainer at no charge, and grant him or her a perpertual license
>      to use, copy, modify and distribute your changes without
>      restriction.  The preferred way to do this is by e-mail or by
>      uploading the files to a server and e-mailing the URL.  If the
>      number of changes is small (e.g., a modified Makefile) e-mailing
>      the diffs will do.  The e-mail address to be used is
>      <maintainer@vim.org>.

Would this kind of offer be GPL-compliant?  It seems that one choice is
and one choice isn't; I'm not sure what the implications are.
Certainly, releasing a program under a GPL-compatible license doesn't
give you free reign to use GPL libraries with it if you negotiate a
different, incompatible license; I don't know how it works when there
are compatible and incompatible options.

Glenn Maynard

Reply to: