[Info-vax] Python and various libraries updated

[Arne Vajhøj]

On 8/6/2020 12:57 PM, Jean-François Piéronne wrote:
> Le 06/08/2020 à 18:24, Arne Vajhøj a écrit :
>> On 8/6/2020 12:21 PM, Duane Krahn wrote:
>>> I just took a look at the recent release notes for VSI Samba for
>>> OpenVMS 4.6-5F (August 2020) - in the What's Missing? section on page
>>> 10:  A copy of the source code for Samba on OpenVMS is not included
>>> with the installation kit; however we will provide a copy of the code
>>> on request (email support at vmssoftware.com).
>>>
>>> Based on that statement, it would seem that VSI would make its open
>>> source modifications available to anyone upon request.
>>
>> And being compliant with GPL.
> From
> https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#DoesTheGPLRequireAvailabilityToPublic
> 
> """
> Yes. You can charge any fee you wish for distributing a copy of the
> program. Under GPLv2, if you distribute binaries by download, you must
> provide “equivalent access” to download the source—therefore, the fee to
> download source may not be greater than the fee to download the binary.
> If the binaries being distributed are licensed under the GPLv3, then you
> must offer equivalent access to the source code in the same way through
> the same place at no further charge.
> """

Hmmm. I can see where you get the idea from.

But I don't think that FAQ matches the actual license texts well.

GPL 2.0 is pretty simple.

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.en.html

<quote>
  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,
</quote>

Which says either:

provide source with binary on "medium customarily used for software 
interchange"

or:

offer to provide source "valid for at least three years", "charge no
more than your cost of physically performing source distribution" and
"medium customarily used for software interchange"

Telling people that they can email and ask for a copy and get
a link to a ZIP file seems compliant with the second. Assuming
that download is considered a medium and considering how much GPL 2
software get downloaded then that seems pretty obvious.

GPL 3.0 is a bit more complex.

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.en.html

<quote>
6. Conveying Non-Source Forms.

You may convey a covered work in object code form under the terms of 
sections 4 and 5, provided that you also convey the machine-readable 
Corresponding Source under the terms of this License, in one of these ways:

     a) Convey the object code in, or embodied in, a physical product 
(including a physical distribution medium), accompanied by the 
Corresponding Source fixed on a durable physical medium customarily used 
for software interchange.
     b) Convey the object code in, or embodied in, a physical product 
(including a physical distribution medium), accompanied by a written 
offer, valid for at least three years and valid for as long as you offer 
spare parts or customer support for that product model, to give anyone 
who possesses the object code either (1) a copy of the Corresponding 
Source for all the software in the product that is covered by this 
License, on a durable physical medium customarily used for software 
interchange, for a price no more than your reasonable cost of physically 
performing this conveying of source, or (2) access to copy the 
Corresponding Source from a network server at no charge.
...
d) Convey the object code by offering access from a designated place 
(gratis or for a charge), and offer equivalent access to the 
Corresponding Source in the same way through the same place at no 
further charge. You need not require recipients to copy the 
Corresponding Source along with the object code. If the place to copy 
the object code is a network server, the Corresponding Source may be on 
a different server (operated by you or a third party) that supports 
equivalent copying facilities, provided you maintain clear directions 
next to the object code saying where to find the Corresponding Source. 
Regardless of what server hosts the Corresponding Source, you remain 
obligated to ensure that it is available for as long as needed to 
satisfy these requirements.
</quote>

A physical distribution is the same rules as V2.

But they changed the rules for download.

"equivalent access to the Corresponding Source in the same way through
the same place at no further charge", "If the place to copy the object
code is a network server, the Corresponding Source may be on a different
server" and "maintain clear directions next to the object code saying
where to find the Corresponding Source" do say free download, but it can
be a different server - and it requires clear directions for where to
find source.

I guess you can claim that an email address to request source and
a response with a download link is not clear direction. But I think
that is being a bit picky.

Arne