ng0 <[email protected]> writes: > Mike Gerwitz <[email protected]> writes: > >> On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 17:17:44 +0200, Nils Gillmann wrote: >>> I don't have the resources (time) to deal with this, but we are >>> pretty sure that N1[1] is violating the GPL. >> >> Unfortunately, if N1 is the copyright holder, then they can't really >> violate (in a useful sense) their own license---as the copyright holder, >> they're the only one that can enforce it. > > Hm, that's right. My choice of words was off then. > It should've been "Is there something missing in the way they > distribute an GPL licensed application"? > >> I notice also that they don't include a full copy of the GNU GPLv3+ >> (they just have a mention of it in LICENSE.md). >> >>> It is a GPLv3 or later[2] project which only provides apm "build" >>> instructions to users and no instructions (or even hints) on how >>> to build your own binaries. >> >> What's the result of the build? Is it not something you can run? > > My problem is that it is just an apm/npm build instruction. Is > this how awful package "management" has become today so that this > is considered to be okay? I could try to get the toolchain to > build this on gentoo (on guixsd this would very obviously > currently not be possible) and see what the result is, but so far > I just see npm/apm. > >> https://github.com/nylas/N1/tree/master/build >> >> JavaScript (well, CoffeeScript in this case, I suppose) projects don't >> really have "binaries". > > They distribute .deb, .exe, how are those not binaries in the > sense of binaries. > Before I reply further and might correct what I have now written > and sent, let me try to build it with their definition of > build instructions. > >> See also https://github.com/nylas/N1/blob/master/.travis.yml
Okay with my choice of systems (gentoo, guixsd) I am unable to test the build of this software sufficient enough without wasting my own time. I might add ebuilds for gentoo to my overlay when I have the time again, and come back to this thread. -- ng0
