This may have been raised before and if so I apologise for not being able to
find it.
I was wondering if someone on the list can please explain the relationship that
GPLv3 has in preventing Apple from distributing updated builds with their
operating systems. I've read over the GPLv3 (I'm not
On 31/10/2010, at 1:03 AM, John H Terpstra j...@samba.org wrote:
On 10/30/2010 02:48 AM, Stephen Norman wrote:
This may have been raised before and if so I apologise for not being
able to find it.
No apology needed. We can discuss this topic on this list.
I was wondering if someone
+1100, Stephen Norman wrote:
Prevention may have been a poor choice of words here. I guess what I'm
asking is, if Apple was to ship Samba 3.2 or above with their OS, what other
parts of the OS (if any) would need to be released under GPLv3? For
instance, if Finder used some part of Samba
Apologies for the previous message. Its what happens at 4 in the morning!
On 31/10/2010, at 4:47 AM, Stephen Norman stenorman2...@me.com wrote:
Just to be clear, I'm not attempting to spread FUD about Samba or the GPL.
I'm just trying to understand how the license changes may or may
:
On 10/30/2010 12:00 PM, Stephen Norman wrote:
On 31/10/2010, at 1:03 AM, John H Terpstra j...@samba.org wrote:
On 10/30/2010 02:48 AM, Stephen Norman wrote:
This may have been raised before and if so I apologise for not
being able to find it.
No apology needed. We can discuss this topic
of GPLv3. I don't think we'll
ever know though.
Thanks again,
Stephen
On 31/10/2010, at 2:48 PM, Jeremy Allison wrote:
On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 05:16:53AM +1100, Stephen Norman wrote:
I'm not sure if you could say that Apple doesn't like GPLv3, so that is
spreading FUD there as well
