* Ed W <[email protected]> [120303 13:29]: > Hi > [..] > >> My understanding is that for a GPL licence one should provide a > >> copy of these patches in the "code dump", not just an http link? > >> Is that your understanding? > > I think your understanding is incomplete, and I recommend that you > > read through the license again. > > ?? Why all the stupid hints rather than just stating the answer!
I'm sure it's just frustration but your emails really make you sound like an a-hole with a sense of entitlement. They're legal licenses. As with anything involved with lawyers and the legal system you really need to decide for yourself what needs to be done (most people to be safe would contact a lawyer.) If you're at a company releasing a product then the company most likely has a legal dept or legal consultant. They certainly would here in the US (I know you said you're not in the US so perhaps that's not the case.) Have you looked at http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html? I'm not a lawyer (by a far shot) but what's the problem with creating a script that when run pulls the upstream files from /usr/portage/distfiles, the files and ebuilds from /usr/portage for whatever packages you have installed on whatever you're releasing? If I were releasing commercial software I'd want all that on a local mirror (in source control too) so that I could recreate any released versions. Todd
