a) You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices
stating that you changed the files and the date of any change.
b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in
whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any
part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third
parties under the terms of this License.
c) If the modified program normally reads commands interactively
when run, you must cause it, when started running for such
interactive use in the most ordinary way, to print or display an
announcement including an appropriate copyright notice and a
notice that there is no warranty (or else, saying that you provide
a warranty) and that users may redistribute the program under
these conditions, and telling the user how to view a copy of this
License. (Exception: if the Program itself is interactive but
does not normally print such an announcement, your work based on
the Program is not required to print an announcement.)
These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If
identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program,
and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in
themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those
sections when you distribute them as separate works. But when you
distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based
on the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of
this License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the
entire whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote it.
I think this is the most important bit:
"But when you distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a
work based on the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the
terms of this License"
river styx internet
On Tue, 27 Apr 1999, Paul DuBois wrote:
> At 12:18 PM -0500 4/27/99, <unknown@stripped> wrote:
> >> Is it normal ? Is there a plan to optimize the CLIENT_COMPRESS
> >> protocol in order to have more rapid transfers ? Why not to use the
> >> gzip algorithm (it's GNU isn't it ?) ?
> >Perhaps because whenever you incorporate GNU code into a package and
> >release it, the entire package falls under GNU license, which would be
> >remarkably horrible for MySQL.
> MySQL already includes GNU code - the readline library.
> Paul DuBois, paul@stripped
> Northern League Chronicles: http://www.snake.net/nl/