2010/7/13 christopher hopman <[email protected]> > After reading the developer agreement, I would like to point out the fact > that Apple does not seem to be the distributor of the app store apps. They > merely act as an agent for the developer, i.e. Kyle. Also, it appears that > Kyle is in violation of both the GPL and the Iphone Developer Agreement as > gabba noted. I completely support his violation of the Developer Agreement > as I think its terms are absolutely ridiculous. > > I tend to agree with gabba that we should not support Apple's draconian > system by allowing Wesnoth to be distributed in the app store. However, I > also recognize the fact that a lot of Wesnoth contributors support such > distribution. The licenses that I suggested before (CDDL and MPL) would > allow for violation-free distribution in the app store. >
There's a major difference between the MPL/CDDL and the GPL, which I'm surprised you didn't mention. MPL/CDDL would allow someone to incorporate any part of Wesnoth into his own code, but not share back his own code as a result, as long as this new code is in brand new source files. Those licenses only force you to publish modified versions of the original source files. I don't think this is a very good copyleft, since the modified files you get back can easily be unusable. For instance for my whiteboard project, I added my own source files but also modified code and interfaces in many existing source files. If I could do that and keep my code private, you having access to only the modified files that were part of wesnoth before my project would be useless, since they would now depend on proprietary code for their functionality. At least the GPL ensures that if someone profits from your code, he shares a functional program back to you. > That is, such distribution could be done that didn't violate the license > and also didn't violate the Iphone Developer Agreement. This is because, for > the most part, *the dev agreement restricts the licensing of the binary > and not the source code*, and the licenses do the opposite. Unlike > BSD-like licenses the source code would be required to stay open and freely > licensed. > Can you provide quotes to support that affirmation I bolded? I don't have time right now to go in depth again and do an Apple dev agreement vs CDDL/MPL analysis, but I was under the impression that the iPhone dev agreement made no distinction between distribution in source and binary form, i.e. it prohibits distribution of software in both forms, as long as it was made with the iPhone SDK. Gabriel gabba > -Chris Hopman > > Also, all wesnoth dependencies are distributed under a license compatible > with either CDDL or MPL. > > _______________________________________________ > Wesnoth-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev > >
_______________________________________________ Wesnoth-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
