[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

Licence question regarding GPLv2 Ruby script

anonymous

7/6/2007 11:46:00 AM

Hi all,

The Ruby beautifier script
(http://www.arachnoid.com/ruby/rubyBeaut...) is released under
the GPLv2 licence.

I understand what the GPLv2 means for a source code which has to be
compiled and so on like the Ruby interpreter. In the case of a Ruby
script, I'm not sure to understand correctly all the licence terms.

If I execute only the script from my application (an IDE like
application) to format a Ruby source, do I have to release my
application under the GPLv2 licence ?

Thanks in advance.

--
Posted via http://www.ruby-....
6 Answers

tsela.cg

7/6/2007 1:20:00 PM

0

On 6 jul, 13:46, anonymous <eclipse.sur...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The Ruby beautifier script
> (http://www.arachnoid.com/ruby/rubyBeaut...) is released under
> the GPLv2 licence.
>
> I understand what the GPLv2 means for a source code which has to be
> compiled and so on like the Ruby interpreter. In the case of a Ruby
> script, I'm not sure to understand correctly all the licence terms.
>
> If I execute only the script from my application (an IDE like
> application) to format a Ruby source, do I have to release my
> application under the GPLv2 licence ?
>

I am by no means a lawyer nor a GPL expert, but my understanding is
that you would have to release your application under the GPL only if
it is a derivative work of the Ruby beautifier script. This means:
- if you include the source code of the script directly in your own
source code (for instance making it a method). This is the clearest
case of "derivative work".
- if you require it in your code (assuming your program is in Ruby),
which is Ruby's equivalent of linking. This action also makes your
program a derivative work.
However, if you only call the script as an external program (giving it
an input file and letting it do its work), then I think your program
and that script fall under the "mere aggregation" rule, and you don't
have to release your program under the GPL. Do note that you still
have to abide by the GPL if you are distributing the Ruby beautifier
script, but only for the beautifier script itself.

You might want to take a look at the Free Software Foundation FAQ (I'd
give the link, but my browser is acting up strangely at the moment and
I cannot open the FSF site. It should be easy to google it up anyway).
I think they answer that very question. Do not take my answer as
definitive answer since, as I warned you at the beginning, I am
neither a lawyer nor a GPL expert.

Hope that helps.
Christophe.

Kristoffer Lundén

7/7/2007 9:42:00 PM

0

Hello,On 7/6/07, anonymous <eclipse.survey@yahoo.com> wrote:>> If I execute only the script from my application (an IDE like> application) to format a Ruby source, do I have to release my> application under the GPLv2 licence ?>See this FAQ: http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html#MereAgg... short: no, you don't have to. :)-- Kristoffer-- Kristoffer Lundén? kristoffer.lunden@gmail.com? kristoffer.lunden@gamemaker.nuhttp://www.game... 0704 48 98 77

anonymous

7/9/2007 8:15:00 AM

0

Kristoffer Lundén wrote:
> See this FAQ:
> http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html#MereA...
>
> In short: no, you don't have to. :)
>
> -- Kristoffer

Thanks Matz and Kristoffer for your replies.
The link to the GPL FAQ makes things more clear.

--
Posted via http://www.ruby-....

Ubiquitous

9/2/2012 8:55:00 PM

0

Obveeus

9/3/2012 10:22:00 PM

0


"David Barnett" <dbar3518@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> weberm@polaris.net says...
>>
>> In article <k1vicp$mhs$1@dont-email.me>, Obveeus@aol.com wrote:
>>
>> >EROTIC DAUGHTERS OF EMMANUELLE: (1974) no character named Emmanuelle,
>> >no
>> >daughters of said character, no closing credits so that remains
>> >unverified,
>> >no plot...well, that isn't fair...there was some sort of plot about a
>> >Nobel
>> >winning (for best pimp?) guy who was being pursued by the French police
>> >because there were no women left in Paris. Mostly, this was lots of
>> >dirty
>> >old men sleeping with beautiful women (never did figure out what was in
>> >it
>> >for them)
>
> Probably money.
It had to be something other than money. Getting beautiful women to like
you for your money is not Nobel prize worthy.


wdstarr

11/2/2012 5:49:00 PM

0

In article <k23ahh$pac$1@dont-email.me>,
"Obveeus" <Obveeus@aol.com> said:

> "David Barnett" <dbar3518@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>> weberm@polaris.net says...
>>
>>> EROTIC DAUGHTERS OF EMMANUELLE: (1974) no character named
>>> Emmanuelle, no daughters of said character, no closing credits
>>> so that remains unverified, no plot...well, that isn't fair...
>>> there was some sort of plot about a Nobel winning (for best
>>> pimp?) guy who was being pursued by the French police because
>>> there were no women left in Paris. Mostly, this was lots of
>>> dirty old men sleeping with beautiful women (never did figure
>>> out what was in it for them)
>>
>> Probably money.
>
> It had to be something other than money. Getting beautiful women
> to like you for your money is not Nobel prize worthy.

Hey, after they gave Barack Obama a Nobel Prize for winning an
election, anything is possible.

(To be fair to the man, it's not like that didn't catch him by
surprise as much as it did everyone else in the world.)

-- wds