I use git for version control.
Let's say I use GPL-licensed code in my programs during early development before replacing it with my own code more tailored for my specific purposes.
If I then distribute my software and make the git repository available to users, does my software have to be GPL? There is no GPL-licensed code in the released version, but the repository still contains it and one could checkout a version which includes it.
It's a gray area.
I guess this is one of a few reason vendor won't give access to code during development.
Technically, it's a good practice but legal-wise it's a shitstorm.
At worst, you can create and expose to public the git containing your release code only.
>>54478176
Some has to ask Stallman or a good IP lawyer about this.
The GNU General Public License (GPL) and Open Sores is much like the Herpes simplex virus (HSV) and Cold Sores, after it infects the host it can only be rendered dormant but never fully eradicated.
The only way to be safe is to avoid it completely and never come in contact with it in the first place.
>>54478176
Do not distribute that code or make it available via git if you're concerned about the legal implications. I doubt anything will happen, FSF of only really interested in going after big companies.
Just write a script that takes the current head of the branch and makes it available on a separate download page. Then you can call it via a git-hook wherever you push an update to that branch.
>>54478176
>>54478249
If the program you distribute does not use GPL'd code, then no your program does not use GPL (unless you explicitly chose to license your code with it). Pretty simple actually
>>54478176
If it's your code you can license it any way you want, because you own the copyright to it. The question that you need to answer is whether or not your program is a derivative work of the GPLed program. If your program includes specific algorithms that do exactly the same thing as the GPL program but are just slightly rewritten then you may need to use the GPL. If you just translate the GPL code into another language then you may need to use GPL. If you can argue that the code is fundamentally different then you may not have to.
However, I think that for all non-trivial free software programs these days you should probably use something with as least as many legal protections as the GPLv2, if not the GPLv3. Proprietary companies are in a recession right now, so the time is ripe for new free software projects with a strong copyleft.
