Sign in Join

Live chat for Free Pascal, Lazarus, Delphi and every Pascal programmer.

Mailing lists / fpc-pascal / 2008-05

avl_tree.pp unit license

5 messages · 3 people ·

Reply by email Subscribe to this list Your subscription

Read-only archive. Use j and k to move between messages.

Vladimir Zhirov

Hi,

I've got a question about the license of unit avl_tree.pp, that comes with FCL. FPC FAQ states that

Applications created by the compiler and using the runtime library come under a modified library gnu public license (LGPL), which permit no restriction on the type of license the application has.

Meanwhile, the avl_tree.pp contains the following comment:

This source is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or * (at your option) any later version.

AVL_Tree unit is used by dom.pp.

So the question is: are there any restrictions on the license of applications that use dom.pp and avl_tree.pp?

Mattias Gaertner
to Vladimir Zhirov
Show quoted text 20 lines
Hi, I've got a question about the license of unit avl_tree.pp, that comes with FCL. FPC FAQ states that > Applications created by the compiler and using the runtime library > come under a modified library gnu public license (LGPL), which > permit no restriction on the type of license the application has. Meanwhile, the avl_tree.pp contains the following comment: > This source is free software; you can redistribute it and/or > modify * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as > published by * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of > the License, or * (at your option) any later version. AVL_Tree unit is used by dom.pp. So the question is: are there any restrictions on the license of applications that use dom.pp and avl_tree.pp?

You can use both licenses. The license header of avl_tree.pp should be changed to the normal FPC header.

Mattias

Michael Van Canneyt
to Vladimir Zhirov: I've got a question about the license of unit avl_tree.pp, that comes with FCL. FPC FAQ…
Vladimir Zhirov wrote 20 lines
Hi, I've got a question about the license of unit avl_tree.pp, that comes with FCL. FPC FAQ states that > Applications created by the compiler and using the runtime library > come under a modified library gnu public license (LGPL), which permit > no restriction on the type of license the application has. Meanwhile, the avl_tree.pp contains the following comment: > This source is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify * > it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by * > the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or * > (at your option) any later version. AVL_Tree unit is used by dom.pp. So the question is: are there any restrictions on the license of applications that use dom.pp and avl_tree.pp?

Normally, the FPC FAQ is correct.

Mattias Gaertner (of the Lazarus team) wrote the unit. Lazarus switched to the same license as FPC. However, at that time the unit source was already moved to the FCL package, and I suppose he forgot to update the license text.

I'll ask him if it is OK to switch the license text to the standard FPC license text. I do not expect problems, but I'll mail you in person to say that it is OK.

Good enough ?

Michael.

Michael Van Canneyt
to Mattias Gaertner: On Sun, 25 May 2008 11:46:20 +0500 You can use both licenses. The license header of…
Mattias Gaertner wrote 26 lines
On Sun, 25 May 2008 11:46:20 +0500 Vladimir Zhirov wrote: > Hi, > > I've got a question about the license of unit avl_tree.pp, that comes > with FCL. FPC FAQ states that > > > Applications created by the compiler and using the runtime library > > come under a modified library gnu public license (LGPL), which > > permit no restriction on the type of license the application has. > > Meanwhile, the avl_tree.pp contains the following comment: > > > This source is free software; you can redistribute it and/or > > modify * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as > > published by * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of > > the License, or * (at your option) any later version. > > AVL_Tree unit is used by dom.pp. > > So the question is: are there any restrictions on the license of > applications that use dom.pp and avl_tree.pp? You can use both licenses. The license header of avl_tree.pp should be changed to the normal FPC header.

Seems like some mails crossed :)

I changed the license in trunk, merged to fixes.

Michael.

Show quoted text 6 lines
Mattias _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Mattias Gaertner
to Michael Van Canneyt: Normally, the FPC FAQ is correct. Mattias Gaertner (of the Lazarus team) wrote the unit.…
Show quoted text 31 lines
On Sun, 25 May 2008, Vladimir Zhirov wrote: > Hi, > > I've got a question about the license of unit avl_tree.pp, that > comes with FCL. FPC FAQ states that > > > Applications created by the compiler and using the runtime library > > come under a modified library gnu public license (LGPL), which > > permit no restriction on the type of license the application has. > > Meanwhile, the avl_tree.pp contains the following comment: > > > This source is free software; you can redistribute it and/or > > modify * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License > > as published by * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 > > of the License, or * (at your option) any later version. > > AVL_Tree unit is used by dom.pp. > > So the question is: are there any restrictions on the license of > applications that use dom.pp and avl_tree.pp? Normally, the FPC FAQ is correct. Mattias Gaertner (of the Lazarus team) wrote the unit. Lazarus switched to the same license as FPC. However, at that time the unit source was already moved to the FCL package, and I suppose he forgot to update the license text.

The avl_tree unit was from the codetools that were and still are GPL-2. I agreed with the license change of FPC but someone else did the license change of FPC's svn and forgot it.
Maybe you should check other units too?

Show quoted text 5 lines
I'll ask him if it is OK to switch the license text to the standard FPC license text. I do not expect problems, but I'll mail you in person to say that it is OK. Good enough ?

Mattias