Bharat Mediratta wrote:
> Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
>
>> GPL says that the project can only be redistributed if the source
>> files, build scripts, and install scripts, are provided in the same
>> preferred form as used by the developers. Any GPL project *must* pay
>> attention to this if its developers have respect for the license used,
>> and in order to allow the package to be distributed without forcing
>> the redistributors to be GPL violators. If Gallery2 is included in OS
>> distribution without proper provision of sources than a judge could
>> grant an injunction which blocks the entire OS from being distributed.
>>
>> It seems wise for someone to take the time to produce a proper source
>> distribution for Gallery2.
>>
>
> Let's start by establishing that we (Gallery team) are in no way
> pedantic about the terms of the GPL. We will happily figure out a way
> to work with you on this. However, we're trying to focus our energy on
> G3 so G2 is going to get short shrift while we get G3 out the door.
> Please don't put a huge onerous burden on us to support G2 forever.
> We're a bunch of guys, writing software for free in our vanishing spare
> time. We're already putting heart and soul into this, any more is
> trying to get blood from a stone.
>
> Jon, I am the copyright holder and can specifically grant you whatever
> latitude you require.
>
> >From looking at the specific bug, the issues all lie in very specific
> locations. The simple and most expedient way to resolve this is to
> simply drop those from the distribution. This will cause no harm to the
> product whatsoever since we offer a way *inside the app* for you to
> point and click your way to reinstalling these modules directly. No
> harm done. So I suggest that you follow this algorithm:
>
> 1) Get the latest code from SVN
> 2) Delete modules/{uploadapplet,slideshowapplet,remote,panorama}
> 3) Delete modules/core/classes/GalleryStorage/g2_db2.jar
>
> In short, I complete agree with Jon's proposal #2. For all practical
> purposes this will satisfy the GPL requirement, have minimal impact on
> our users and minimal impact on the development team.
>
Actually, that proposal was for my actions WRT what Fedora ships. I
don't really need any specific latitude, as what Fedora will be
distributing will be a subset of the official G2 distribution. The build
I'm working on starts with the .zip distribution and goes from there.
That will satisfy the GPL as far as Fedora is concerned. If you want to
get all the Gallery Project ducks in a row from a GPL perspective, a
simpler method of access to the complete source would be the way to go,
but that's ultimately up to the Gallery project members yourselves.
I certainly appreciate that you have limited time for what is
essentially a volunteer effort. My work in this space is that as well.
--
in your fear, speak only peace
in your fear, seek only love
-d. bowie
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 ]