I have a project "segin-utils" which is more a meta-project (it's an umbrella for multiple tiny projects that don't really warrant a separate project for themselves)
segin-utils mostly serves the purpose of "free Subversion host", much like Code Hosting abusers create projects for random file hosting, except all code hosted is under one or another OSI-approved license, and is true source code. Binaries generally aren't provided. However, I have built one project as a Windows binary. It's "matwm2", a X11 window manager released under the MIT license. I have uploaded the Win32 .exe, along with two different X11.dll files (which, as an X11 program, it would depend on). The reason for providing X11.dll is that it's quite a hard library to get ahold of. However, I don't have the source code for the X11.dll versions I am currently providing (neither in repo or in my possession elsewhere). Since libX11 is itself an open source library (as a part of X.org - latest source here: http://www.x.org/releases/X11R7.7/src/lib/libX11-1.5.0.tar.gz), is it a violation to provide these binaries without providing the source to the particular versions I have? I've included my original location source for the binaries in their download descriptions. One was found in a Subversion repository along with a Windows port of ImageMagick, and the other with a Windows NT port of a very old shared source shareware X11 image viewer (xv). My downloads list: http://code.google.com/p/segin-utils/downloads/list -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Project Hosting on Google Code" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-code-hosting?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
