On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 11:10:45PM +0100, Arrakistor wrote: > I mean, the latest torpark is great and all, but does it warrant > 40,000 unique visitors? I don't really think so. I'm really surprised.
Hi Steve, Can you enlighten us about the current status with respect to following the licenses of Firefox, Portable Firefox, and Tor? I see that there's a link to a source tarball at the bottom of http://torpark.nfshost.com/ but a) I don't see a license for Tor there, and b) just copying the licenses for software that is released under the GPL is not sufficient to follow those licenses. You need to follow section 3 of the GPL: the simplest approach in my opinion is to make the complete source code available for download from the same site as the binary. (You may also find it smart to include other documentation/etc files in the "source" package, since people will look there to obtain everything they need to recreate your exe, and I'm guessing it doesn't include all the required files currently.) It is very important that we resolve this, though. People in the free software world make their software available with a very specific set of requirements, and disregarding them makes the whole community mistrust you. > And when will they call it Torpark, not TorPark? At least they don't call it TORpark or TORPARK :) --Roger
