licence

Posted Apr 28, 2010 8:21 UTC (Wed) by mpr22 (subscriber, #60784)
In reply to: licence by b7j0c
Parent article: LLVM 2.7 released

I don't find GPLv3 confusing.

"If you distribute binaries, you have to make the source you built them from available (best plan is to just chuck it on the CD/DVD). If you distribute the software as device firmware, you have to let the device operate with end-user-modified replacement firmware. If you have patents touched on by the software, and you distribute it, you have to licence them for free."

Have I missed anything?

licence

Posted Apr 28, 2010 8:31 UTC (Wed) by patrick_g (subscriber, #44470) [Link]

>>> Have I missed anything?

Excellent summary ! Thanks a lot.

licence

Posted Apr 28, 2010 10:34 UTC (Wed) by trasz (guest, #45786) [Link] (1 responses)

You missed the whole shared libraries problem, which may or may not exist, depending on who you ask, and problems with e.g. C++ templates.

licence

Posted Apr 28, 2010 14:30 UTC (Wed) by mpr22 (subscriber, #60784) [Link]

Thank you - I figured there had to be something, given that people seemed to be honestly claiming confusion. Clearly I shall have to have a look at these issues and refine my summary :)