On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 10:20:14PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote: > Scripsit Andrew Donnellan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > I mean the *developer* must comply with both licenses, eg if you d/l > > under the GPL and MIT, then the developer must still put the written > > offer for source code > > By "developer", do you mean "copyright holder"? He can legally do > whatever he pleases. In particular, he can offer the general public > a licence under terms that he does not himself comply with. This is my favorite! Oh, wait, no, its better:
http://justinpryzby.com/sla/ The fortran version is GPL, but the C source version is proprietary, but the obscured C source (*cough*) is GPL (actually, the GPL header may have been pasted there by a 3rd party to placate me). If I weren't on so many mailing lists I might be able to concentrate and figure out C/Fortran calling conventions to fix this.. -- Clear skies, Justin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
