Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Chaos
the Windows installer requires you to accept the GPL. Unfortunately I see this a lot with open source software, but it is unnecessary and wrong
|
It's unnecessary, but requiring acceptance is harmless and somewhat beneficial. The GPL has nothing in it that applies to the end user, so accepting it imposes no obligations on the end user. However, by displaying it, the end user is advised of when it applies, what action will cause it to apply to him and of his obligations if he redistributes it - particularly if he modifies it before redistribution. I don't see that as bad or "wrong." How will the user know when it applies if he isn't told?
Quote:
The GPL is not a EULA!
The GPL is a copyright licence, not an End User License Agreement. It governs the terms under which you may redistribute the program, and it applies automatically, whether you accept it or not.
|
All agreements and licenses, including the GPL, need to be accepted to apply. Acceptance is indicated by "modifying or propagating a covered work." It's quite reasonable for Kovid to tell the user that he will be deemed to have accepted the GPL if he does either.
Quote:
|
You may say that it isn't such a big deal to make people unnecessarily accept licences, but I don't like the way it makes open source software similar to proprietary, closed source software which does make you agree to draconian usage licences!
|
I agree that requiring acceptance is annoyingly similar to the way proprietary, closed source software requires acceptance of an EULA. I suppose one could make the installer say 'You may proceed without accepting this license if you do not "modify or propagate" this work,' then allow it to go forward even if the acceptance box is not checked, but that might not even be possible with the way the Windows installer is set up. I doubt it's worth the bother to program it, even if it's possible to do.