Is this better for tomsrtbt?

Tom Oehser tom at
Wed Apr 25 12:37:15 UTC 2001

> 	[DJW:]  The problem here is that you can almost 
> 	guarantee that people will deep link to the floppy
> 	constructing tarball, defeating the whole purpose of
> 	the requirements that the licence accompany the software,
> 	i.e. to ensure that every recipient is fully informed of
> 	the licence.

I solve that problem by changing the version number in the tarfile name
every couple of days, and not providing a 'tomsrtbt-current' symlink:)
I used to have such a link, and mirrors would have year-old files called
'current' on the archives.  No-one can make a meaningful link to any of
the archive files, because I release versions so often (now 1.7.269).

The traditional solution to this problem is some kind of click-through
license.  Clearly, click-through licenses, passwords, cookie-requirements,
and the like, are MORE contrary to the intent of the GPL, than it is to
distribute the license in an archive along with the tarfile.  I am working
right now on the links and files to see if I can get it acceptible to all,
*without* having to replace emacs with 2^17 bytes of licenses on the
floppy itself, however poetic that might be...


More information about the License-discuss mailing list