On Tue, 23 Oct 2012, Derek Gaston wrote:
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Roy Stogner <royst...@ices.utexas.edu> wrote:
There is absolutely nothing wrong with distributing binary versions
of GPL/LGPL software as long as the source is available _somewhere_.
This is a popular enough misconception to have made the FAQ.
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#UnchangedJustBinary
This isn't our situation.
"The general rule is, if you distribute binaries, you must distribute
the complete corresponding source code too." does cover the situation
of anyone who wants to distribute GPL software modified to link
against libMesh. This would be more difficult if libMesh did not
include the complete corresponding source code of libMesh.
In our situation the source is being distributed for those
"binaries".... just not by us.
Someone else supplying the source code could qualify under 6(d) of the
GPL, assuming that "Regardless of what server hosts the Corresponding
Source, you remain obligated to ensure that it is available for as
long as needed to satisfy these requirements." I'd like people to be
allowed to distribute GPL'ed libMesh applications without them having
to ensure that warp.povusers.org page is online or prepare their own
fparser source copy first.
We've already had to wean ourselves off GMV and fork code from a
pre-LGPL-incompatible GetPot version; from now on I think it's just
safest to assume that any third party code availability is subject to
change without notice.
Not only that but this link is about binaries of _GPL_ applications
/ libraries. That doesn't apply to BSD licensed libraries.
As I said before, I'm speaking about the hypothetical case of a user
wanting to link libMesh with a different, GPL'ed code.
I don't see how linking in a BSD licensed binary blob can ever be a
GPL violation
The whole reason the GPL was created was to protect people's source
code from being redistributed in derived works linked with binary
blobs, regardless of the binary's license. That's basically the whole
difference between GPL and LGPL too - the latter lets you redistribute
derived works that combine source-code-available and binary-only
objects, the former doesn't.
If you've got the support of the original authors of all the GPL'ed
components, of course, you can add whatever exceptions you wish. But
the only exception the GPL itself adds is for "system libraries".
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLIncompatibleLibs
---
Roy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_sfd2d_oct
_______________________________________________
Libmesh-devel mailing list
Libmesh-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-devel
