Re: Reveal Codes macros now works

On 11/07/19 07:32, Uwe Brauer wrote:
> > On 10/07/19 17:54, Andrew Pitonyak wrote:
>
> > I would also appreciate having a copy of them to try. Unfortunately, I
> > am likely to be highly critical, but then, I hope those comments will be
> > helpful.
>
> Please take in mind, that Andrew is not the original author. I find it
> very generous of him to provide his help to make these macros work. My
> hope is, as I said elsewhere, that others developer get and idea of the
> feature and might generalize it to not read only.
>
> > Please do email them directly ...
>
> > No your changes are NOT GPL if you don't want them to be. Please mark
> > your changes as being under the LO MPL licence. Okay, the resultant file
> > can only be *distributed* under the GPL, but if somebody then rewrites
> > the GPL stuff out, the file will change to LO licence.
>
> I am not sure I understand (I am no lawyer, but I have contributed over
> the years to GPL software).
> I thought GPL is a rather capitalistic license, you obtain something
> (code) you have to pay for it (by your code).
>
> So if you modify a existing program under GPL (and I think modify means
> here more than 5 lines of code, either add functionality or modify it),
> you must release the code under the same license. You are not allowed to
> release them under stay CC, or MIT or whatsoever. So when you say your
> code, do you mean these 5 lines and whether you can release these 5
> lines under the license of your choice. Is that what you mean?
Note that this is not seen as an appropriate forum for discussing legal
issues ...

But yes. YOUR code you can place under any licence you like. There is no
problem adding GPL code to a BSD original document so why should there
be a problem adding BSD code to a GPL original document.

The problem comes when your licence of choice clashes with the licence
on the original document. In my example above, complying with the GPL
means you are also complying with BSD, therefore there is no problem
distributing the document under the GPL. But downstream can separate the
two parts and distribute the BSD bit under BSD.

Think blood groups - BSD is like group O, a universal donor. GPL is like
AB, a universal acceptor.

And mixing eg MPL1 and GPL is like mixing A and B - in order to comply
with one, you need to break the other, therefore the result is toxic.

Note that, to the best of my knowledge, there is no licence that
actually allows you to *change* the licence on any body else's code.

Cheers,
Wol