Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.debian.project > #10789

anti-tarball clause and GPL

From Adam Borowski <kilobyte@angband.pl>
Newsgroups linux.debian.project, linux.debian.legal
Subject anti-tarball clause and GPL
Date 2019-07-24 00:50 +0200
Message-ID <ynbLz-2fg-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw


Hi!
In the light of the currently discussed GR proposal, I wonder if the
following license clause would be considered DFSG-free and GPL-compatible:

##################
I do not consider a flat tarball to be a preferred form for modification. 
Thus, like any non-source form, it must be accompanied by a way to obtain
the actual form for modification.  There are many such ways -- unless you
distribute the software in highly unusual circumstances, a link to a
network server suffices; see the text of the GPL for further details.
##################

I believe such a statement would be GPL-compatible; rationale:
* by the 2011 Red Hat kernel sources outcry, it is obvious such a tarball
  is long obsolete
* a flat tarball deprives the recipient of features of modern VCSes
* comments giving rationale for a change tend to be written as VCS commit
  messages
* future forms are not banned: it is conceivable that next week someone
  invents a revolutionary new form that wins over git

Thoughts?


Meow!
-- 
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Latin:   meow 4 characters, 4 columns,  4 bytes
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Greek:   μεου 4 characters, 4 columns,  8 bytes
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋  Runes:   ᛗᛖᛟᚹ 4 characters, 4 columns, 12 bytes
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ Chinese: 喵   1 character,  2 columns,  3 bytes <-- best!

Back to linux.debian.project | Previous | NextNext in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

anti-tarball clause and GPL Adam Borowski <kilobyte@angband.pl> - 2019-07-24 00:50 +0200
  Re: anti-tarball clause and GPL Jonathan Carter <jcc@debian.org> - 2019-07-24 01:30 +0200
  Re: anti-tarball clause and GPL Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org> - 2019-07-24 02:20 +0200
    Re: anti-tarball clause and GPL Adam Borowski <kilobyte@angband.pl> - 2019-07-24 02:40 +0200
      Re: anti-tarball clause and GPL Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> - 2019-07-24 07:20 +0200
        Re: anti-tarball clause and GPL Adam Borowski <kilobyte@angband.pl> - 2019-07-25 18:50 +0200
          Re: anti-tarball clause and GPL Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> - 2019-07-25 19:00 +0200
            Re: anti-tarball clause and GPL Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2019-07-25 19:20 +0200
            Re: anti-tarball clause and GPL Norbert Preining <preining@logic.at> - 2019-07-25 21:10 +0200
      Re: anti-tarball clause and GPL Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> - 2019-07-24 12:00 +0200
      Re: anti-tarball clause and GPL Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2019-07-28 15:40 +0200
        Re: anti-tarball clause and GPL Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> - 2019-07-28 18:30 +0200
  Re: anti-tarball clause and GPL Yao Wei <mwei@debian.org> - 2019-07-24 03:00 +0200
    Re: anti-tarball clause and GPL Adam Borowski <kilobyte@angband.pl> - 2019-07-25 20:10 +0200
      Re: anti-tarball clause and GPL "Yao Wei (魏銘廷)" <mwei@debian.org> - 2019-07-26 03:50 +0200
  Re: anti-tarball clause and GPL Giacomo Catenazzi <cate@cateee.net> - 2019-07-24 10:20 +0200
  Re: anti-tarball clause and GPL Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> - 2019-07-24 22:30 +0200
    Re: anti-tarball clause and GPL Yao Wei <mwei@debian.org> - 2019-07-25 00:40 +0200
      Re: anti-tarball clause and GPL Norbert Preining <preining@logic.at> - 2019-07-25 21:10 +0200

csiph-web