[Info-vax] Python and various libraries updated

[Arne Vajhøj]

On 8/6/2020 11:34 AM, Jean-François Piéronne wrote:
> Le 06/08/2020 à 17:20, Arne Vajhøj a écrit :
>> On 8/6/2020 11:05 AM, Jean-François Piéronne wrote:
>>> [snip]
>>>> If you had said that you think VSI has a moral/ethical problem of
>>>> using a lot of open source and not giving enough back to the open
>>>> source community then that would have been a completely different
>>>> topic than claiming that they are violating licenses.
>>>>
>>> What is not clear in:
>>>
>>> """
>>> The fourth section for version 2 of the license and the seventh section
>>> of version 3 require that programs distributed as pre-compiled binaries
>>> be accompanied by a copy of the source code, a written offer to
>>> distribute the source code via the same mechanism as the pre-compiled
>>> binary, or the written offer to obtain the source code that the user got
>>> when they received the pre-compiled binary under the GPL.
>>> """
>>
>> Nobody is denying what GPL means.
>>
>> But that is not what I am discussing above.
>>
>> I am trying to make a clear distinction between moral/ethical
>> concerns and legal concerns.
>>
>> Moral/ethical concerns give one significant freedom to
>> state subjective opinions.
>>
>> Legal concerns are a bit different.
> [snip]
> 
> It's seems that we do not have the same reading  of
> https://gpl-violations.org/faq/sourcecode-faq/
> 
> So I will subscribe to the associated mailing list and ask them, so we
> will see what is right, my understanding of the GPL license or yours.
> 
> Maybe it's you, maybe not...

I think we are pretty much in agreement on what GPL means.

We seem to have a very different opinion about level
of details necessary to publicly accuse a named
company of copyright infringement.

Arne