3 ms·
I agree that pressure and strict timelines can be a pain, but compliance with the GPL is not optional.
by pingswept 15y ago
I agree that pressure and strict timelines can be a pain, but compliance with the GPL is not optional.
- recoiledsnake 15y agoThey released the GPL parts.
- pingswept 15y agoI hadn't heard that. Is that verifiable at this point by some means?
- ben1040 15y agoThey've made posts in the android-building Google group when making GPL code drops. Here is the most recent, corresponding to GPL portions of Android 3.2.1. https://groups.google.com/d/topic/android-building/IrFiwQ-hLKM/discussion https://groups.google.com/d/topic/android-building/IrFiwQ-hL...
- pingswept 15y agoThat's good and convincing. I stand corrected.
- guelo 15y agoOnly Android's modifications to the Linux kernel and a few other tools are under GPL. Most stuff is Apache 2.0.
- vog 15y agoThat's what Google used to tell us, but according to the guys of gpl-violations.org, this has always been a flat-out lie. Those "few other tools under GPL" are quite a lot and in no way negligible.