Re: usage of zsh for profit?

[Christopher Faylor <cgf@redhat.com>]

On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 11:13:53PM +0100, Andrew Markebo wrote:
>And the endless discussion begins.. 
>
>| But it's actually a cygwin program, at least on Windows, right?
>
>Depends on how they port it.. probably
>
>| Aren't all cygwin programs GPLed because of cygwin1.dll?  Now as to
>
>Well you actually can compile a program with cygwin gcc and skip
>cygwin1.dll, but probably not in this case.. 
>
>| whether including a GPL program in your commercial product is OK I
>
>Well it is ok, as long as you provide the source to the stuff using
>cygwin1.dll, zsh in this case, and the cygwin1.dll source too of
>course.. If I am not completely off in my readings..
>
>Earlier you could buy/fix a license from redhat to use cygwin1.dll
>commercially, without needing to send sources.. No idea how it is
>today.

You can still purchase a cygwin "buy-out" license but it sounds like,
for this application, it is just simple enough to provide the sources
under the terms of the GPL.

Note that if you provide the Cygwin DLL, you have to make sources
available for it as well, not just zsh.

The cygwin buy-out would allow you to not distribute the sources for the
DLL.  That means that you'd only have to worry about the ZSH licensing
terms which seem pretty straightforward.

Again, I am not advocating this.  It seems like it should be pretty easy
to just tar up the cygwin sources for whatever you're distributing and
include them somewhere on a CD or, alternately, be ready to provide the
sources if someone asks for them.

(No, just pointing to the cygwin web site isn't enough to satisfy the GPL)

cgf