3 ms·
"...your license terms may conflict with the limitations set forth in Section 3 of those Terms, but only to the extent required by the FOSS that you use." That
by takluyver 14y ago
"...your license terms may conflict with the limitations set forth in Section 3 of those Terms, but only to the extent required by the FOSS that you use."
That appears to mean that you can release a GPLed application if you use pre-existing GPL code, but you can't just decide to release your application under the GPL because you want to. In the latter case, there's no requirement "by the FOSS that you use", so the anti-reverse-engineering clauses kick in.
But I guess that's purely academic, because if it's your own code, you can release the binary on Microsoft's terms, and separately offer the source code under GPL.
- jbk 14y agoFun. :) Nitpick: it says the "FOSS that you use", not the "pre-existing FOSS that you use". Your new code could be the one you use too ;) Anyway, my opinion is that Microsoft did some work to not exclude FOSS, a contrario from Apple.
- Evbn 14y agoThe relevant issue is sideloading and proprietary compilation. iOS falls down because it is impossible for a user to build an app from source and install an app on a vendor-approved machine.
- ConstantineXVI 14y agoAs far as I can make out, as long as you have the debug tools and a 'developer license' (just need a MS ID, no fee), you can install arbitrary un-approved Metro apps on WinRT/8. Compilation still has to happen on an x86 machine (no MSVS on ARM; csc is actually on the WinRT image but missing DLLs); it's not great but still somewhat better than the iOS situation.