-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
> If you change the name and icon (viewer) and leave everything else intact,
> do you still have to distribute sources? How about if you change about
> screen and other text messages?
If you change the icons to suit your business logos, or the forms to
suit your business needs, distributing those changes wouldn't serve to help
the community much, and generally don't fall under the redistribution clause
of the GPL. If someone used "Your" distributed icon in their product, it
would be a copyright (and likely trademark) violation against your company.
The important thing is that if you change the _source_ to the
project, that those changes be available to the community, so they can
benefit from them. For example, if you added support for image maps within
Plucker, or parsing forms, or talking to a back-end database of content..
_those_ changes are required to be set back into the community, per the
license.
Look and feel changes are generally not something that needs to be
contributed back, but there's a fine line there too. Let's say that Plucker
only supported black and white images, and you extended that to add support
for color images and a colored toolbar/icons to go with it in the viewer and
distiller/parser, _those_ changes should be contributed back, because
someone can benefit from them in their own use of Plucker.
Was that any more clear?
If you feel you want to ask what is and isn't require to be
distributed back, we can always help you, as well as make a custom version
for your company, on a contract basis if need be.
d.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE+YkTlkRQERnB1rkoRAqJGAJ0cox3ybH1GbDmgbNFGQWPK2D/5uQCdGkxW
etQRrOPcTKEgjg6H3+iZyNI=
=7EwS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
plucker-dev mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.rubberchicken.org/mailman/listinfo/plucker-dev
