Re: New open source UML tool including Ada support

[Markus E Leypold <development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVETHIS@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de>]

> On Tue, 2007-07-17 at 12:10 +0200, Markus E Leypold wrote:
>
>> > FWIW, the license text can be read now by performing an
>> > installation of the software.
>> 
>> Ah good. But am I right in supposing it's at the moment a
>> dont-redistribute-License?
>
> Saying that the license text is based on the LGPL is a good
> characterization, I think.

So the license of the existing executable is already based on LGPL?
And I have to add the sources of the executable if I redistribute
it. How quaint, given that there are no sources yet.

> (AFAICS they ask you not to do a few things with Ameos itself.
> For example, create your own Ameos and then give it away without
> ScopeSET being involved. Please, don't take this sentence as
> literally describing things.)

If there is a condition in any way similar to that, that would
actually remove the 'GP' from LGPL. Because the essence of (l)GPL is
the right to redistribute _modified_ code. In case one wants to
(L)GPL-open-source one's code, one has to live with that provision, I
think. Usually others don't have the resources anyway, but the option
and the effort to fork defines the level of protection of the
user/distributor against arbitray release and support policy (and
unforseaable changes thereof) by the main developers: If things become
unbearable, the cost to fork is finite (see the Joomla/Mambo split as
an example) instead of virtually inifinite (if a fork is excluded).

I seriously hope the condition you're talking about is only a request
not really a license condition.

If the situation is really like you say, using (L)GPL to advertise for
the code would be impertinent. Would a "don't distribute modified code
on your license" even be approved by OSI? (I will have to look that up).


Regards -- Markus

PS: Unfortunately one can't see the license at the site w/o
    downloading and runnng the exe-file. Even trying to unpack the
    exe-file doesn't work for (it doesn't seem to be a "standard" self
    extracing executable). I can't (i.e. don't want to) run any
    untested software on the build reference machines now, so this
    will have to wait.