Re: Build question

On Thu, 16 Apr 2009, Jon Ciesla wrote:
> I would tend to agree.  The only reason my plan to drop features from G2 and
> move to G3 shortly after it's release is at all viable is that I'm
> maintaining it for Fedora, which thrives on being bleeding-edge.
>
> A proper source distribution would head off any legal issues, whereas the
> current situation certainly poses some risk.

Note that the way the GPL is worded, if developers normally build
their software by manually typing compiler commands and without using
any makefile, ant script, or shell script, then it is just fine to
deliver bare source files without any automated built method.  If a
task only needs to be done once in a blue moon, some developers might
do that.  GPL does not require that the build method be easy to use,
or even be documented.  However, if a built product is included then
any sources required to build it need to be distributed.  If a special
tool (e.g. Java compiler) is needed, then there may need to be
provisions for how to obtain it.

Bob
--
Bob Friesenhahn
bfriesen@..., http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
GraphicsMagick Maintainer,    http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stay on top of everything new and different, both inside and
around Java (TM) technology - register by April 22, and save
$200 on the JavaOne (SM) conference, June 2-5, 2009, San Francisco.
300 plus technical and hands-on sessions. Register today.
Use priority code J9JMT32. http://p.sf.net/sfu/p
__[ g a l l e r y - d e v e l ]_________________________

[ list info/archive --> http://gallery.sf.net/lists.php ]
[ gallery info/FAQ/download --> http://gallery.sf.net ]