From: "Philip Oakley" <philipoakley@iee.org>
To: "Junio C Hamano" <gitster@pobox.com>,
"Jonathan Smith" <Jonathan.Smith@fphcare.co.nz>
Cc: <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: GPL v2 authoritative answer on stored code as a derived work
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 23:58:03 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <C0429EC95C2F44528E2A1336FB7A2D98@PhilipOakley> (raw)
In-Reply-To: xmqqzivtfphe.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com
From: "Junio C Hamano" <gitster@pobox.com>
> Jonathan Smith <Jonathan.Smith@fphcare.co.nz> writes:
>
>> It's pretty clear that code stored in a Git repository isn't
>> considered a derived work of Git, regardless of whether it is used
>> in a commercial context or otherwise.
I'm guessing here, but I suspect that while its 'pretty clear' to Jonathan,
that he has met others who aren't so clear or trusting, and it's that
distrustful community that would need convincing.
>>
>> However, I'm unable to find this stated in any authoritative and
>> unambiguous manner.
The GPL2 FAQ's (search for 'data')
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.en.html#TOCGPLOutput
(should link to "Is there some way that I can GPL the output people get from
use of my program? For example, if my program is used to develop hardware
designs, can I require that these designs must be free?") and
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.en.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL
both cover the fact that the repo (data) is not a derived work, and thus not
subject to GPL2.
>
> Is it reasonable to ask for such a statement? I doubt it,
> especially if "It's pretty clear".
(Rhet) If there were to be such a statement, where should it be placed, and
who could issue it? It couldn't be part of the COPYING licence file (because
it's not supposed to be modified).
It could be in the User Manual, but that wouldn't carry much weight with the
already worried, or perhaps the git(1) man page [E.g. 'discusssion' section
maybe], or even in the git-scm.com 'book', but really it would need Jonathan
(and others with similar FUD issues) to suggest what they'd need.
>
> Without such a statement, I think we have already seen that the
> commercial adoption is already appealing.
>
Hopefully the links can help Jonathan if he is having any local
difficulties.
--
Philip
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-27 23:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-25 3:08 GPL v2 authoritative answer on stored code as a derived work Jonathan Smith
2016-01-25 19:06 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-01-27 23:58 ` Philip Oakley [this message]
2016-01-28 8:16 ` Johannes Schindelin
2016-01-31 20:51 ` Philip Oakley
2016-01-31 21:00 ` [RFC/PATCH] Git doc: GPL2 does not apply to repo data Philip Oakley
2016-01-31 22:08 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-01-31 22:15 ` Jonathan Smith
2016-02-01 7:35 ` Johannes Schindelin
2016-02-01 7:49 ` Matthieu Moy
2016-02-01 8:14 ` Jeff King
2016-02-01 8:16 ` Jeff King
2016-02-01 10:57 ` Philip Oakley
2016-02-01 10:53 ` Philip Oakley
2016-02-01 11:34 ` Philip Oakley
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=C0429EC95C2F44528E2A1336FB7A2D98@PhilipOakley \
--to=philipoakley@iee.org \
--cc=Jonathan.Smith@fphcare.co.nz \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox