Re: [PROPOSAL] Full text of GPL must be included
Brian Mays <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> If we're going to be so anal about interpreting the GPL, then why
> doesn't anyone mention the requirements for distributing the source.
> Certainly, by a strict interpretation of the license (along with an
> active imagination for dreaming up scenarios whereby a deb package
> can end up on the far end of the world, away from anyone or anything
> knowledgeable about GNU or GPLed software), we should be including the
> GPLed sources in our packages.
Except that the GPL section 3 explicitly says that providing a copy of
the source on the same download site counts as "accompanying".
Different verbs are used for the requirement to include the license
text itself in section 1; the "put it on the same site" clause does
not really apply.
The point is that we can, do, and should distribute individual
packages in many different contexts.