> > By the way, isn't it enough to publish it on the net? E.g. one could > > provide a link to the gimp website for the original source, plus publish > > their modification on their own website (or include only these parts on > > the CD)? > > This is handled by the FAQ: > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#SourceAndBinaryOnDifferentSites That text is just as fussy as the whole GPL license. It may be because of my poor English, but even after reading it twice, I have no idea if it is legal for example (assuming I made some extension to GIMP) * to sell a CD with my version of GIMP and provide the its source on my web-site. * to provide the source of my changes on my site, add a link to GIMP website without any agreement, but periodically check if gimp.org and the gimp project is alive, and publish the source on my site only if they are dead. Am I against the low if I put a binary gimp package from debian.org on my web page without doing the same with the source package? Am I against the low if I make the /usr directory (where all the GLP binaries are) of my debian linux server available through anonymous ftp? Best regards, Alpar > > The GNU GPL FAQ is a must-read for anyone who does want to distribute > GNU (L)GPL software, and a should-read for anyone who does engage in > discussions about this topic. :) > > > HTH, > Michael _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
