home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
- Path: sparky!uunet!news.claremont.edu!fenris!jwinstea
- From: jwinstea@fenris.claremont.edu (Jim Winstead Jr.)
- Subject: Re: SLS: now available (for testers)
- Message-ID: <1992Aug16.231807.1438@muddcs.claremont.edu>
- Sender: news@muddcs.claremont.edu (The News System)
- Organization: Harvey Mudd College, WIBSTR
- References: <1992Aug15.224805.26718@crd.ge.com> <1992Aug16.023634.21330@sol.UVic.CA> <1992Aug16.184115.27017@wixer.cactus.org>
- Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 23:18:07 GMT
- Lines: 61
-
- In article <1992Aug16.184115.27017@wixer.cactus.org> rhodesia@wixer.UUCP (Felix S. Gallo) writes:
- >pmacdona@sanjuan (Peter MacDonald) writes:
- >>
- >>Please go back and (re)read my first SLS posting. In it I clearly
- >>state that Softlanding will make C source available as per GPL, but that
- >>they discouraged it. However, I expect few to want it because it would
- >>be horrendously large.
- >
- >How 'available' will it be, considering the next paragraph in which
- >you say that you don't actually have the source yourself? If I buy
- >your distribution, will you then, at no extra cost, send me the
- >source? Didn't think so.
-
- First off, go read the GPL - you might learn something. Then read the
- excellent observations someone (I forget who) posted today - it was
- worth reading, made valid points, and wasn't just someone going off
- half-cocked. Guess what I think of your post?
-
- >>To be clear, I have not, and will not, volunteer to set up a
- >>centrally administered source tree for Linux. Although I am not denying
- >>that there may be some merit to it, I just don't have the time (do you?).
- >
- >If you don't have time to comply with the GPL, then you're in the
- >wrong business.
-
- Mr. Macdonald does not have to 'set up a centrally administered source
- tree for Linux' to hold true to the terms of the GPL. You are making
- a completely baseless attack - he has said he will make available
- source, if requested, charging only for distribution costs. That is
- all the GPL requires him to do.
-
- >>Instead, I did something that wasn't all that difficult [...]
- >
- >If it isn't all that difficult, then why are you balking at providing
- >a (very easy to put together) source tree? If you want to make money
- >by distributing the software, you have to obey the rules which the
- >software was written under. Your laziness is no excuse.
-
- Putting together a source tree and a binary distribution are worlds
- apart - have you done either? The GPL (the 'rules') do not require him
- to make available a complete source tree - only the source to the
- programs which he distributes as part of his SLS release, as requested
- by someone who has purchased the package from SLS.
-
- Please, don't even consider responding until you know what you are
- talking about in terms of what SLS is responsible for doing, and then
- I expect you won't want to post - what SLS is doing is perfectly
- legal, *as long as they make available source for GNU/Copylefted
- products at distribution cost for the next three years*, which Peter
- Macdonald has said he will do (i.e. make sure is done). SLS is not
- even required to do that for various X stuff.
-
- (Yes, this is mildly inflammatory, but this discussion really is
- getting out of hand. Also, I apologize if my distinctions between
- Peter Macdonald and SLS aren't clear - they are separate entities.)
-
- --
- + Jim Winstead Jr. (CSci '95)
- | Harvey Mudd College, WIBSTR
- | jwinstea@jarthur.Claremont.EDU
- + or jwinstea@fenris.Claremont.EDU
-