Re: new win32 port of GTK http://introspector.sourceforge.net/dia_win32.htm

[James Michael DuPont <mdupont777 yahoo com>]

Guys,
I think that my points are very simple and easy to understand.
Lets come to a conclusion on this matter, and get on with working
towards a solution.

--- Hans Breuer <Hans Breuer org> wrote:
> At 11:38 07.01.03 -0500, Owen Taylor wrote:
> >> --- Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com> wrote:
> > - These two isues are entirely unrelated. If people are 
> >   unhappy with the ease of compilation of GTK+ on a platform,
> >   they should work on making it easier (as you seem to be
> >   doing), not try to force people to make it easy to compile
> >   for them by GPL lawyering.
> >

You will find my interpretation of the GPL, the GPL
faq following. This is not about making it easy to compile, it is about
putting all the pieces in one spot

See section 3 of the GPL : 
----------------------------------------------------------------
"The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for
making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source
code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any
associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control
compilation and installation of the executable. However, as a special
exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that
is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the
major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system
on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies
the executable. "
----------------------------------------------------------------

"is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the
major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system"

libiconv, gettext, glib and gtk are distributed with debian and are
easy to compile. The sources are effectivly in the same place.

Under windows it is a nightmare!
The port to windows needs all of that this is very clearly covered by
the GPL.

----------------------------------------------------------------
See section 3 of the GPL : 
"If distribution of executable or object code is made by offering
access
to copy from a designated place, then offering equivalent access to
copy the source code from the same place counts as distribution of the
source code, even though third parties are not compelled to copy the
source along with the object code. "
----------------------------------------------------------------

NOTE : "from the *same* place counts as distribution of the source
code"


That means you have to put the sources in the same place as the
executables, my asking of hans for the sources of the binaries is
completly legitimate.


----------------------------------------------------------------
The faq says :
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#AnonFTPAndSendSources
"The sources you provide must correspond exactly to the binaries. In
particular, you must make sure they are for the same version of the
program--not an older version and not a newer version. "

----------------------------------------------------------------

That means that a link or just the name of the source is not enough.

Here is the full text again, and not that at the time i wrote to hans,
he did not comply with any part of the section 3. When I asked him for
a copy of the sources, he removed the binaries.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html
3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it,
under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of
Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following: 

a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source
code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2
above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or, 

b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years,
to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of
physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable
copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the
terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for
software interchange; or, 

c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to
distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is allowed only
for noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in
object code or executable form with such an offer, in accord with
Subsection b above.) 
----------------------------------------------------------------------

So, I think that my criticism of the practices at the time in july were
valid and fair. Since then I have taken steps to fix the problem and
present a set of sources that are in full compliance with the gpl. 

Please do give my effort at least a reference from your GTK+ page, 
many people do not know about this work,and would benefit from it.

thanks, 
mike


=====
James Michael DuPont
http://introspector.sourceforge.net/

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com