On 2/5/2016 10:38 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
On Fri, 5 Feb 2016 at 10:34 Emile van Sebille <em...@fenx.com
<mailto:em...@fenx.com>> wrote:
>> Except for that nasty licensing issue requiring source code.
>>
>> Emile
> Licensing requires, in the GPL at least, that the *modified*
sources be
> made *available*, not that they be shipped with the product.
Looking at
> the Python license, and what tools already do, there is zero need to
> ship the source to stay compliant.
Hmm, the annotated Open Source Definition explicitly states "The program
must include source code" -- how did I misinterpret that?
Because you left off the part following: "... and must allow
distribution in source code as well as compiled form". This is entirely
a discussion of distribution in a compiled form.
Aah, 'must' is less restrictive in this context than I expected. When
you combine the two halves the first part might be more accurately
phrased as 'The program must make source code available' rather than
'must include' which I understood to mean 'ship with'.
Emile
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
