Re: lumikki

[David Jones <drj@...>]

On Oct 14, 2004, at 20:57, Asko Kauppi wrote:

> I'm currently releasing LuaX as LGPL (no complaints there, so far). 
> With Hamster and Lumikki I've taken another road, more "strict" open 
> source I guess, due to their role as tools instead of end components.
>
> What exactly do you think is non-GPL in my interpretation?  Lot of 
> commercial software is done using gcc; where does this differ?

Well, for example that if I modify the work I need to provide the 
modifications.

GPL is a cunning piece of work.  Perhaps the most cunning thing about 
GPL is that it only covers acts of copying and distribution.  
Generally, under the GPL, I am free to do with a work as I please, 
including running it however I like and modifying it however I like.  
It is _only_ when I distribute my modified work that the GPL kicks in.  
And even then I only have to distribute the source to those people that 
I distribute the work to (though they, of course, can distribute it to 
anyone).  As long as I keep my modifications to myself I can do what I 
like.  And this counts within an organisation.

David Jones
>  Asko Kauppi wrote:
> > >  >Lumikki is released under the GPL license. You are free to use the 
> > > software in any project, for any purpose, as long as you don't (need 
> > > to) make modifications to it. If you need to modify, you also need 
> > > to provide the modifications to others that might benefit from them. 
> > > This is how GPL works in a nutshell.