Re: testing before a release

[Etienne M. Gagnon]

On Wed, Nov 07, 2001 at 03:53:38PM -0600, Aaron M. Renn wrote:
> I think what Per is getting at is that if you modify the library, the
> requirements of the GPL apply to the modified library code.  So if you
> modify Classpath for your VM, you still have to distribute the modified
> source code, pass along the same rights to modify and distribute, etc.

I disagree.  If I was to write a proprietary VM, link it against a "modified
Classpath", the exception (when carried to the derivative work) does not
force me to redistribute the source code along the "resulting linked 
executable".

Do not forget that even if the modified Classpath is under the GPL + exception,
the GPL makes no obligation to redistribute your modifications, unless you 
actually
distribute an executable.  But the Classpath exception's goal is exactly to
alleviate this obligation when you link it with proprietary modules.

In other words, I am allowed to redistribute a proprietary VM linked with
a modified Classpath without redistributing the source code to nothing.

That's the big problem of the current license for contributors, which see their
work less protected than under a BSD(no adv.)-like license.
 
> You are free to license your VM under the GPL or any other license
> you like and still use the Classpath library.  You can also modify
> the Classpath library and it does not affect your VM license.  But
> the modified library code itself has to remain free software under
> its current license.


Yep, but you have no obligation to distribute it:

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLRequireSourcePostedPublic

Q: Does the GPL require that source code of modified versions be posted to the 
public?

A: The GPL does not require you to release your modified version. You are free 
to make modifications and use them privately, without ever releasing them. This 
applies
to organizations (including companies), too; an organization can make a 
modified version and use it internally without ever releasing it outside the 
organization. 

But if you release the modified version to the public in some way, the GPL 
requires you to make the modified source code available to the users, under the 
GPL. 

Thus, the GPL gives permission to release the modified program in certain ways, 
and not in other ways; but the decision of whether to release it is up to you. 


[My additional notes]: The Classpath exception allows you to link the compiled 
derived version into a proprietary executable, so you now can really use 
Classpath like if it was in the public domain...

This is what I have been repeating on this list over and over. People seem to 
understand the problem, then say it would be difficult to solve because all the 
people involved in changing the license, then they forget about it again.  Its 
fine with me if you think having Classpath into a public-domain-equivalent 
license it what you wanted in the first place.  I doubt it.  My problem with it 
is that I do have to release the source code of my modifications under either 
the GPL [not acceptable], or under the GPL+exception [too permisive to my 
taste], or simply release executables with no source code [against my 
philosophy].

I just hope somebody in the Classpath project starts understanding the 
importance of this "license exception BUG".  RMS did acknowledge to me that 
what I am stating here is true, and a valid interpretation.  He said he would 
ask Classpath developers, by I guess he has so many things on his plate that he 
forgot about it (once again).

Etienne


-- 
Etienne M. Gagnon                    http://www.info.uqam.ca/~egagnon/
SableVM:                                       http://www.sablevm.org/
SableCC:                                       http://www.sablecc.org/