Date:	Thu, 8 Jan 1998 21:32:23 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id:	<199801090232.VAA18036@delorie.com>
From:	DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To:	eldredge AT ap DOT net
CC:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to:	<199801090150.RAA16224@adit.ap.net> (message from Nate Eldredge
	on Thu, 8 Jan 1998 17:50:47 -0800 (PST))
Subject:	Re: patches GPL your software?!?!? rediculous!

> I can understand perfectly DJ's wish to have changes to the library
> cause it to be GPL'ed. And I see his point that bug fixes should be
> incorporated into the release and then become LGPL. However, I also
> see the point of people who feel that the GPL'ing punishes them for
> fixing bugs. Unfortunately, DJ's idea doesn't seem to work well in
> this case, since the time between submission of a patch and its
> inclusion (i.e. release of next version) tends to be very long.

My $0.02 on that is that *I* am the only one who can invoke the GPL
when someone ships a modified libc in their app, and I will not do so
in the cases we are talking about (patches/bug fixes).  I will be
perfectly happy with a "best faith" effort to get the patches to me,
so that I at least have the option of adding them to my copy of the
sources.  If I reject your patch for some reason, you're off the hook.

For the physics majors, this implies that the djgpp copyright is not
temporal.  As long as the patch is in djgpp - but it doesn't matter
when! - you're using official sources.  Eventually.  You just don't
know which version yet.

Frankly, I don't concern myself with legal issues and such.  I'm a
live-and-let-live kind of guy.  I don't profit from djgpp, so you
can't hurt my profits.  I have no incentive to stop you from doing
whatever you want, and plenty of incentive to get you to cooperate
with djgpp development.  However, just in case some jerk wants to play
legal-beagle with djgpp, I want the biggest stick I can get to beat
him over the head with.

- Raw text -