Felix Hartmann <[email protected]> writes: > Okay - so inside the download I put the information from where one can > download the source, right? > e.g. openmtbmap.org/mkgmap_src.zip
Sure, that would be fine. Or just have openmtbmap.org/mkgmap/mkgmap_src.zip openmtbmap.org/mkgmap/mkgmap.jar openmtbmap.org/mkgmap/index.html (or autogenerated) and consider yourself done, having made the source available in the same place. If you are only offering jars of code that is exactly a public svn revision, then I can't see anyone caring about the jar/distribution/GPL issue, but I think it is good for overall practice to be careful about it anyway. > And that src.zip should always be from the same date as the mkgmap.zip. Yes. The requiremnt is "complete corresponding source", so that someone who knows what they are doing (with java, in this case) could rebuild it. > However - what I don't understand is, why the official mkgmap-latest > download doesn't include the source then...?? My experience is that when the people who are maintaining a repo offer downloads, and it's clear to everyone that the binaries are just built From the repo, with no intent to hide anything, no one worries about the details. It's not hard to find the official sources starting with a download URL. But at http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/download/mkgmap.html I see src links, which is fully satisfactory under 3a.
pgpF4GgtmSZRp.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
