* usage of zsh for profit? @ 2002-02-06 15:48 Gabor 2002-02-06 16:05 ` Zefram 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Gabor @ 2002-02-06 15:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: zsh-users Hi, my company would like to use the NT port of zsh to distribute with its product so we can write a reasonable shell script to do some information gathering. We'd just be using the zsh binary and write some shell scripts. No zsh source will be modified. Are there any hangups? The main reason is that batch scripts are braindead and we don't want to write a program if we don't have to. We already have a Bourne shell script that does some info gathering on Unixen and we just want to do a quick port of it. I hope this is the right place to ask. Thanks. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: usage of zsh for profit? 2002-02-06 15:48 usage of zsh for profit? Gabor @ 2002-02-06 16:05 ` Zefram 2002-02-06 18:32 ` Gary Oberbrunner 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Zefram @ 2002-02-06 16:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Gabor; +Cc: zsh-users Gabor wrote: >my company would like to use the NT port of zsh to distribute with its >product so we can write a reasonable shell script to do some >information gathering. There is no problem with this. Zsh is free for all to use (and to modify, etc.); there is no distinction between commercial and non-commercial use. See the LICENCE file for details (you should have received a copy with zsh, it's in the top-level directory of the source distribution). -zefram ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: usage of zsh for profit? 2002-02-06 16:05 ` Zefram @ 2002-02-06 18:32 ` Gary Oberbrunner 2002-02-06 22:13 ` Andrew Markebo 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Gary Oberbrunner @ 2002-02-06 18:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Zefram; +Cc: Gabor, zsh-users Zefram wrote: > Gabor wrote: > >> my company would like to use the NT port of zsh to distribute with >> its product so we can write a reasonable shell script to do some information >> gathering. >> > > There is no problem with this. Zsh is free for all to use (and to > modify, etc.); there is no distinction between commercial and > non-commercial use. See the LICENCE file for details (you should > have received a copy with zsh, it's in the top-level directory of > the source distribution). But it's actually a cygwin program, at least on Windows, right? Aren't all cygwin programs GPLed because of cygwin1.dll? Now as to whether including a GPL program in your commercial product is OK I don't know, IANAL. And perhaps I'm even wrong about the cygwin thing, but AFAIK that's why MinGW was invented -- cygwin licensing problems. -- Gary Oberbrunner ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: usage of zsh for profit? 2002-02-06 18:32 ` Gary Oberbrunner @ 2002-02-06 22:13 ` Andrew Markebo 2002-02-08 0:45 ` Christopher Faylor 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Andrew Markebo @ 2002-02-06 22:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Gary Oberbrunner; +Cc: Zefram, Gabor, zsh-users 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. /Andy -- The eye of the beholder rests on the beauty! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: usage of zsh for profit? 2002-02-06 22:13 ` Andrew Markebo @ 2002-02-08 0:45 ` Christopher Faylor 2002-02-08 3:39 ` Dan Nelson 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Christopher Faylor @ 2002-02-08 0:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Markebo; +Cc: Gary Oberbrunner, Zefram, Gabor, zsh-users 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: usage of zsh for profit? 2002-02-08 0:45 ` Christopher Faylor @ 2002-02-08 3:39 ` Dan Nelson 2002-02-08 4:03 ` Christopher Faylor 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Dan Nelson @ 2002-02-08 3:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christopher Faylor Cc: Andrew Markebo, Gary Oberbrunner, Zefram, Gabor, zsh-users In the last episode (Feb 07), Christopher Faylor said: > 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) I seem to remember that this IS enough, as long as you're simply building stock zsh with stock cygwin. It's only when you make changes that the "you must make sources available for two years" clause really kicks in. I mean, how many cygwin mirrors do we really need? -- Dan Nelson dnelson@allantgroup.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: usage of zsh for profit? 2002-02-08 3:39 ` Dan Nelson @ 2002-02-08 4:03 ` Christopher Faylor 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Christopher Faylor @ 2002-02-08 4:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dan Nelson; +Cc: Andrew Markebo, Gary Oberbrunner, Zefram, Gabor, zsh-users [Reply-To set to zsh-users - beware] On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 09:39:11PM -0600, Dan Nelson wrote: >In the last episode (Feb 07), Christopher Faylor said: >> 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) > >I seem to remember that this IS enough, as long as you're simply >building stock zsh with stock cygwin. It's only when you make changes >that the "you must make sources available for two years" clause really >kicks in. I mean, how many cygwin mirrors do we really need? Sorry, but you're remembering wrongly. That's not how the GPL works. You can't rely on someone else to distribute the sources for you. That's what you'd be doing if you pointed to a Red Hat site for cygwin. It seems like every single person who wants to use a Cygwin-derived binary wants things work like that, but it doesn't. I hate to say this, but if you are releasing binaries you must also make sources available for every GPLed component. If you built zsh with cygwin then it is "infected" with the GPL. Btw, I'm the Cygwin Engineering Manager for Red Hat. I've been over this many times with very many people. Usually, after I try to tell someone that this isn't how the GPL works, they tell me that the are good "Open Source" developers and wonder why I'm picking on them. I am not saying that I advocate this or that it is the perfect way to distribute cygwin. I'm just saying that this is what the GPL dictates. IANAL, yaddda, yadda... cgf ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2002-02-08 4:04 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2002-02-06 15:48 usage of zsh for profit? Gabor 2002-02-06 16:05 ` Zefram 2002-02-06 18:32 ` Gary Oberbrunner 2002-02-06 22:13 ` Andrew Markebo 2002-02-08 0:45 ` Christopher Faylor 2002-02-08 3:39 ` Dan Nelson 2002-02-08 4:03 ` Christopher Faylor
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox https://git.vuxu.org/mirror/zsh/ This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).