On Mon, 2003-01-06 at 19:31, Sumeet Madhukar Moghe wrote: > > But it was not enough to write free software; one had to make sure it > > remained free. In order to keep software free, Stallman devised the > I think we could cut out the "praise RMS my great lord" part here (just > joking;)). But cant we call it a decision by the FSF, rather than that > of 'ol holy beard RMS?
well, fact is the GPL was drawn up mainly by RMS. but i see your point. trying to make changes. > > General Public License (GNU GPL), which practically guarantees the > > continued freedom of any program that is released under its terms. In > > essence, the GPL ensures that a user of GPL-ed software receives the > > program's source code along with the binaries, > Tathagata da, I dont think a distributor is obliged to provide the > source code with the binaries. However, if the customer so desires, then > he is bound by the terms of the GPL to provide the source, at a price if > necessary. the GPL says the distributor must either make the source available, or supply a written offer to make it available in machine-readable format, on a medium customarily used for transferring computer data. that means the initiative must first come from the giver, not the taker. we could add "unless the customer forfeits the right", but that would be cumbersome. thanks for the feedback. - t. -- cogito, ergo es. -- To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the body "unsubscribe ilug-cal" and an empty subject line. FAQ: http://www.ilug-cal.org/node.php?id=3
