4 ms·
That's the main omission in the article. They claim if you modify the source of a GPL program you need to publish your modifications. That's just not correct. I
by usr1106 4y ago
That's the main omission in the article. They claim if you modify the source of a GPL program you need to publish your modifications. That's just not correct. If you distribute a binary form of the modified program you need to make the source available. Google don't distribute their internal kernel, so they are not required to make their modifications available.
- fsckboy 4y agodo they hire contractors? cuz they distribute it to any contractors working on it and cannot add any restrictions to the GPL
- rwmj 4y agoThis isn't the commonly understood interpretation of the GPL.
- usr1106 4y agoThey don't distribute it to contractors, I am pretty sure. If contractors work on it they are under NDA, with no rights to use the code for any other purpose, so considered inside Google. If they weren't you would find many copies on github. Edit: I have no idea whether Google has contractors in such areas. I worked for a company of equal size many years ago and we had contractors everywhere. It was a massive bureaucracy to get access rights for what they needed to do their work, but in the end there was probably not much in the company that some contractor had not access to.