Cygwin licensing: Six pragmatic points
Wed Mar 17 18:17:00 GMT 1999
Since no one seems inclined to stop discussing this, I feel obligated
to make a few pragmatic points:
1) I do not believe that the LGPL is a feasible replacement for the
GPL for Cygwin. Even if I did, I sincerely doubt that I could
convince an Executive VP that it would be a good idea to use
this license agreement.
2) It is unlikely that any arguments put forth here will be likely to
change the Cygwin licensing terms from the GPL to anything else.
The pragmatic reason: Changing the licensing means getting a lawyer
involved. That means that we would have to spend money to change
things. Ain't gonna happen.
3) We do not ignore potential violations of our license terms. We may
be unaware of violations but we do not ignore them.
4) We are willing to handle licensing considerations on a case-by-case
basis but it is unlikely that we will be making things generically
easier for people who want to distribute binaries without sources.
5) When/if the GPL version 3 is released it may have terms that are
more amenable to net releases, allowing people to provide links to
software sources. If so, we will probably adopt this.
6) If a free software distributor needs clarification on what directories
are required to build a complete cygwin distribution I will be happy
to supply him with that information. Here's a hint, though: We provide
just such a package in the snapshots directory, now.
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to email@example.com
More information about the Cygwin