Bretton Vine sent the message below at 08:47 AM 9/1/2006:
>Dragon said the following on 2006/09/01 05:29 PM:
> > Have you actually read the GPL?
> > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.txt
>
>yes plus variations ;-)
>
> > There is such an obligation explicitly defined in it within section 3
> > that st
Dragon writes:
> Bretton Vine did speak thusly:
> >I don't think there is any obligation for someone who changes the source of
> >a GPL product to give the changes back to the original developers, [...]
> End original message. -
>
> There is such an obl
Dragon said the following on 2006/09/01 05:29 PM:
> Have you actually read the GPL?
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.txt
yes plus variations ;-)
> There is such an obligation explicitly defined in it within section 3
> that states that source code of any derivative work MUST be provided
> either
Bretton Vine did speak thusly:
>I don't think there is any obligation for someone who changes the source of
>a GPL product to give the changes back to the original developers, but there
>might be a case of 'good manners' at play in that it is polite to do so. I'm
>sure developers welcome input eve
