Re: Gow, Cygwin alternative refers to GNU programs as open source UNIX tools
Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.org.gnu.discuss |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <87eeljz7jr.fsf@nckx> |
Jean Louis 写道: > I did not notice it. There are no sources on Github, just > binaries They take some effort to miss: <https://github.com/bmatzelle/gow/releases/tag/v0.8.0>. Is there any evidence that the source doesn't correspond to the binaries, e.g., through patching or non-trivial build scripting? > there is Gow license which is contradictory to GPL license > making it This is the MIT (Expat) licence. It is not contradictory to the GPL. > unclear that it is majority GNU programs and GPL license: It is commonplace for software distributions to contain multiple compatible licences. Majority doesn't matter. > https://github.com/bmatzelle/gow/blob/master/licenses/Gow-License.txt Why not link to <https://github.com/bmatzelle/gow/blob/master/licenses/GPL-License.txt> or the directory index? If one copy of the GPL is unclear, the sources contain 15 more to clarify matters. What upstream could do (if they're even still alive) is add a copy of the GPLv3 for convenience. Best to avoid clearly bogus claims of ‘GPL violation’ when asking. Kind regards, T G-R
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 247 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iIMEARYKACsWIQT12iAyS4c9C3o4dnINsP+IT1VteQUCX5iQCA0cbWVAdG9iaWFz LmdyAAoJEA2w/4hPVW15b38BAKnuACAn3Hvy+B8Q4h2yfbgihYMaJpMKSK4RXrfc RzblAQC8Qx/0xdjkmdRiyUGSM4ItSpK/G2zX+OmhEsV8liQHDA== =WPyq -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----