Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
From: "Patrick J. LoPresti" <patl AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: redistributing cygwin1.dll
References: <20030512155928 DOT 0f98d16f DOT khali AT linux-fr DOT org>
	<20030512142302 DOT GB23680 AT redhat DOT com>
	<20030512171354 DOT 1f851221 DOT khali AT linux-fr DOT org>
	<20030512174720 DOT GE25507 AT redhat DOT com>
Date: 12 May 2003 19:51:26 -0400
In-Reply-To: <mit.lcs.mail.cygwin/20030512174720.GE25507@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <s5g8ytb7mgx.fsf@egghead.curl.com>
Lines: 43
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

I'm back.  Did you miss me?

Christopher Faylor <cgf-rcm AT cygwin DOT com> writes:

> It is quite amazing how predictable the response is when people are
> asked to comply with the GPL.  There must be some kind of
> instinctual racial memory that is being tickled by the GPL, causing
> everyone to respond in the same knee-jerk sophmoric manner.

(I think you mean "sophomoric".  Yeah, I know, pointing out spelling
errors is sophomoric.)

There is a simpler explanation than instinctual racial memory, which
is that most people naturally consider strict enforcement of the GPL
to be very silly in cases like this.

The typical exchange is roughly:

  Q: The Cygwin sources are already widely available.  Isn't it silly
  for me to distribute them?

  A: The GPL requires it.

But that does not answer the question!  Just because the GPL requires
something does not necessarily make it less silly.

Why do you want strict enforcement of the GPL in this case?  "Because
it's the license" is not an answer.  The question is, why do YOU want
to enforce it IN THIS CASE?

I think this is a fair question, even for the maintainer.

Put another way, what goal is achieved by making this person
distribute the source?  Again, "compliance with the GPL" is not an
answer...  What good does it achieve, or what evil does it prevent?

It is true that, as maintainer, your opinion carries a lot of weight.
And you are not required to answer anybody's demands.  But your
opinion would carry even more weight if you could justify it with
credible answers to these questions, rather than pulling out the
bureaucratic non-answer "because the license says so".

 - Pat

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/