Feel free to reread LGPL 2.1 here : http://svn.reactos.com/viewcvs/trunk/reactos/LGPL.txt
--- Magnus Olsen magnus@itkonsult-olsen.com wrote:
ReactOS are not a LPGL but GPL it is big diffrent in the licen type
----- Original Message ----- From: "Sylvain Petreolle" spetreolle@yahoo.fr To: "ReactOS Development List" ros-dev@reactos.com Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2005 8:39 PM Subject: Re: [ros-dev] Vote: Allow 3rd-party distribution of ROS through XDCCBot.
If all legal conditions are fulfilled :
- give link to the source
- (alex's idea) provide md5sum of the file(s)
As some people already said, 3d point cant exist. (ros is a LGPL system, some magazines already distribute it, etc.)
[ ] Yes, allow 3rd-party distribution of the OS through the #ros-xdcc channel and ROS-XDCC-001 bot. (support and encourage this distribution)
[X] Yes, allow 3rd-party distribution of the OS, but it must clearly distance itself from officially supported releases (tolerate but do not support this distribution)
[ ] No, only sourceforge and other official ReactOS distribution points should be used.
Kind regards,
Usurp (aka Sylvain Petreolle)
humans are like computers, yesterday the BIOS was all
- today its just a word
Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.com http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
Kind regards,
Usurp (aka Sylvain Petreolle)
humans are like computers, yesterday the BIOS was all - today its just a word
Most of ReactOS is licensed under the GPL. The parts we share with Wine are LGPL.
Gé van Geldorp.
-----Original Message----- From: ros-dev-bounces@reactos.com [mailto:ros-dev-bounces@reactos.com] On Behalf Of Sylvain Petreolle Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2005 21:44 To: ros-dev@reactos.com Subject: Re: [ros-dev] Vote: Allow 3rd-party distribution of ROS throughXDCCBot.
Feel free to reread LGPL 2.1 here : http://svn.reactos.com/viewcvs/trunk/reactos/LGPL.txt
--- Magnus Olsen magnus@itkonsult-olsen.com wrote:
ReactOS are not a LPGL but GPL it is big diffrent in the licen type
----- Original Message ----- From: "Sylvain Petreolle" spetreolle@yahoo.fr To: "ReactOS Development List" ros-dev@reactos.com Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2005 8:39 PM Subject: Re: [ros-dev] Vote: Allow 3rd-party distribution
of ROS through
XDCCBot.
If all legal conditions are fulfilled :
- give link to the source
- (alex's idea) provide md5sum of the file(s)
As some people already said, 3d point cant exist. (ros is a LGPL system, some magazines already distribute it, etc.)
[ ] Yes, allow 3rd-party distribution of the OS through the #ros-xdcc channel and ROS-XDCC-001 bot. (support and encourage this distribution)
[X] Yes, allow 3rd-party distribution of the OS, but it must clearly distance itself from officially supported releases (tolerate but do not support this distribution)
[ ] No, only sourceforge and other official ReactOS
distribution
points should be used.
Kind regards,
Usurp (aka Sylvain Petreolle)
humans are like computers, yesterday the BIOS was all
- today its just a word
Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.com
http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
Kind regards,
Usurp (aka Sylvain Petreolle)
humans are like computers, yesterday the BIOS was all
- today its just a word
Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.com http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
Ge van Geldorp wrote:
Most of ReactOS is licensed under the GPL. The parts we share with Wine are LGPL.
Usurp feels there is confusion due to the fact there is an LGPL.txt and not a GPL.txt
Whereas the GPL license is quoted on COPYING, this is perhaps not the most clear representation.
1) Should we duplicate COPYING as "GPL.txt"? (we could change COPYING to read only "see the file GPL.txt for this project's license, or something to that effect)
2) Should we: a) delete LGPL.txt b) move LGPL.txt to the subdirectories where it applies c) add a preamble to LGPL.txt explaining that it does not cover the entire project. d) other?