Re: Re: Lua for PalmOS - Some questions

[Andre Nathan <andre@...>]

On Fri, 2004-03-05 at 01:22, RLake@oxfam.org.pe wrote:
> Well, I am not a lawyer and all that. But it seems to me that
> term 3c allows you to do almost anything as long as you rename
> the executables, perhaps by prefixing them in some way,

Well, consider the following: you want to include package foo, which is
released under the FAL, on your OS. Say OpenBSD, for example. On
OpenBSD, most if not all of the calls to str(n)cpy and str(n)cat have
been replaced by calls to strlcpy and strlcat. Given this restriction,
the OpenBSD folks would not be allowed to make the changes unless they
rename the executable, which IMO makes no sense since it would still be
the same package. It would just create confusion. Also note that there
is one more restriction on 3c: the need to create a separate manual page
describing the modifications.

Notice how this restriction is a problem even for open source products.

> Similarly, 4a allows you to distribute your modifications in
>  object form only, as long as you also distribute the originals.

"as long as you distribute the originals" is the problem, IMO.

This is getting a bit off-topic... I'm sorry for the noise.

Regards,
Andre

-- 
What I tell you three times is true. -- Lewis Carroll