[SDL] SDL LGPL violations

[Joseph Carter]

On Fri, Jun 28, 2002 at 01:38:21AM +0300, Mikko Rauhala wrote:
> It has come to my attention that at least one instance of LGPL violation
> has occured with respect to SDL. I imagine that this kind of violations
> may also be more common, but I haven't bothered to spesifically seek
> more of them out.

We distribute win32 binaries with the SDL runtime.  We've kept the readme
file for where to get the SDL source, which is AFAICR all that needs to be
done for by a non-commercial project.  If they're not doing this, that's a
problem.

That said, it'd be a good thing to distribute from the thing's download
page the source for the _exact_ version of SDL used to make the binary.
This is useful because that version may not be around on the SDL page
anymore.  Newer versions will probably work, but if they don't, what do
you do then?  Having the source is important, but for technical reasons
more than legal ones, IMO.

-- 
Joseph Carter <knghtbrd at bluecherry.net>     You expected a coherent reply?
 
<Overfiend> lilo: well then, you are probably a responsible thinker. 
            Welcome to a very small club.
<lilo> Overfiend: welcome me when you join :)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 273 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.libsdl.org/pipermail/sdl-libsdl.org/attachments/20020628/af3e98ff/attachment.pgp>