3 ms·

Indeed, that's what the GPL requires. There is absolutely no necessity to put the sources online like they do. Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at

Indeed, that's what the GPL requires. There is absolutely no necessity to put the sources online like they do. Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or, Source: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html

brymaster 12y ago
Actually, it's in Apple's best interests to simply post the sources online and not play fast and loose with licensing as you're suggesting. http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#WhatDoesWrittenOfferValid http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-faq.html#Wh... Source is not distributed along with their binaries nor is a written offer to receive source code that I've seen. http://support.apple.com/kb/DL1761 http://support.apple.com/kb/DL1761 & http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-violation.html http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-violation.html