On 5/21/06, Peter N. Lundblad <peter@famlundblad.se> wrote:
> Garrett Rooney writes:
> > On 5/19/06, Giovanni Bajo <rasky@develer.com> wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I was wondering if it would make sense to ship a binary version of svnmerge.py
> > > in the Windows binary pack. I can easily provide a standalone executable that
> > > works without Python installed. But I have no clue how the packaging process
> > > works, so if there is agreement that this is a good thing to do, I would need
> > > instructions on how to proceed to make it happen (too late for 1.4.0?)
> >
> > I'm not overly thrilled with the idea of shipping a GPLed script in
> > our installer. At this point, all the functionality we ship is under
> > a BSDish license (well, with the exception of the bdb filesystem, but
> > you can leave that out), if we start shipping svnmerge.py all of a
>
> What we're discussing here is the binary Windows distribution, in
> which we don't leave bdb out, so I don't understand the above.
Sure, but with sufficient hacking we could leave it out, and no user
visible functionality would be missing.
> > sudden part of the functionality is is only available if you're ok
> > with the GPL. It's one thing to have contrib scripts that are GPL,
> > another to include it in the installer, IMO.
> >
> But the functionality is still completely optional to use.
>
> But gettext, which we also ship in the binary distribution is LGPL,
> and that's not optional. Isn't that a bigger problem?
LGPL doesn't bother me nearly as much as GPL does.
-garrett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sun May 21 18:13:44 2006