A question on Ruby license

Discussion in 'Ruby' started by David Garamond, Jan 10, 2005.

  1. Suppose I modify Ruby 1.8.2, create some incompatible changes, and call
    it "Ruby 1.8.99". Can I distribute it within my own company? (I assume
    yes?) Can I distribute it open-source+Freely on the Internet? What if I
    call it "SuperRuby 1.0", or "DavesRuby 1.0" or "Topaz 1.0"? Would that
    be called a fork? How does the Ruby copyright/license regulate forks?

    Regards,
    Dave
    David Garamond, Jan 10, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. David Garamond

    Dick Davies Guest

    * David Garamond <lists@zara.6.isreserved.com> [0131 17:31]:
    > Suppose I modify Ruby 1.8.2, create some incompatible changes, and call
    > it "Ruby 1.8.99". Can I distribute it within my own company? (I assume
    > yes?) Can I distribute it open-source+Freely on the Internet? What if I
    > call it "SuperRuby 1.0", or "DavesRuby 1.0" or "Topaz 1.0"? Would that
    > be called a fork? How does the Ruby copyright/license regulate forks?


    I think it's a BSD-alike licence, so yes, so long as the derived work
    gives credit.

    --
    'Yeah, well I'm gonna build my own themepark! With blackjack aaand Hookers!
    Actually, forget the park. And the blackjack.'
    -- Bender
    Rasputin :: Jack of All Trades - Master of Nuns
    Dick Davies, Jan 10, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. David Garamond ha scritto:
    > Suppose I modify Ruby 1.8.2, create some incompatible changes, and call
    > it "Ruby 1.8.99". Can I distribute it within my own company? (I assume
    > yes?) Can I distribute it open-source+Freely on the Internet? What if I
    > call it "SuperRuby 1.0", or "DavesRuby 1.0" or "Topaz 1.0"? Would that
    > be called a fork? How does the Ruby copyright/license regulate forks?


    well:
    3. You may distribute the software in object code or executable
    form, provided that you do at least ONE of the following:
    [...]
    c) give non-standard executables non-standard names, with
    instructions on where to get the original software distribution.

    seems enough to name it Topaz and put instructions.
    gabriele renzi, Jan 10, 2005
    #3
  4. > well:
    > 3. You may distribute the software in object code or executable
    > form, provided that you do at least ONE of the following:
    > [...]
    > c) give non-standard executables non-standard names, with
    > instructions on where to get the original software distribution.


    So not "Ruby 1.8.99" (just to make it clear :)

    Douglas
    Douglas Livingstone, Jan 10, 2005
    #4
  5. Hi,

    In message "Re: A question on Ruby license"
    on Tue, 11 Jan 2005 07:46:52 +0900, Douglas Livingstone <> writes:
    |
    |> well:
    |> 3. You may distribute the software in object code or executable
    |> form, provided that you do at least ONE of the following:
    |> [...]
    |> c) give non-standard executables non-standard names, with
    |> instructions on where to get the original software distribution.
    |
    |So not "Ruby 1.8.99" (just to make it clear :)

    If you really want to name it "Ruby 1.8.99", discard the Ruby terms,
    and apply GPL only. I don't want it though.

    matz.
    p.s.
    It's OK to fork, or create a new language based on Ruby source code.
    Yukihiro Matsumoto, Jan 11, 2005
    #5
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Volker Grabsch
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    731
    Michael Hudson
    Jul 25, 2005
  2. Default User

    Ruby license makes it unuseable ! !

    Default User, Sep 5, 2003, in forum: Ruby
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    87
    Dave Brown
    Sep 5, 2003
  3. Jean-Denis Vauguet

    License of the Ruby user's guide ?

    Jean-Denis Vauguet, Feb 25, 2005, in forum: Ruby
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    102
    Stephan Kämper
    Mar 5, 2005
  4. Jonas Hartmann

    Ruby License Question

    Jonas Hartmann, Apr 20, 2005, in forum: Ruby
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    130
    Jonas Hartmann
    Apr 21, 2005
  5. Gregory Brown

    GPL v3 and Ruby License.

    Gregory Brown, Apr 4, 2006, in forum: Ruby
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    147
Loading...

Share This Page