0

I'm working on an Open Source software project (LGPL) which uses another LGPL-licensed software. To make it easier for users and developers I'm delivering and linking against the compiled thirdparty.

As far as I know I have to include the sources and license-statements of LGPL software if I'm delivering and using it in binary form.

However this would mean that I have to put the compiled version as well as the code of that thirdparty into my repository. Not only would that make the checkout take ages, it would also be somewhat redundant.

Are there any techniques or best practices on how to solve this issue? My project is available on Github if that matters.

Update:

2

The GNU FAQ says the following, which should pretty much answer your question:

Can I make binaries available on a network server, but send sources only to people who order them?

If you make object code available on a network server, you have to provide the Corresponding Source on a network server as well. The easiest way to do this would be to publish them on the same server, but if you'd like, you can alternatively provide instructions for getting the source from another server, or even a version control system. No matter what you do, the source should be just as easy to access as the object code, though. This is all specified in section 6(d) of GPLv3.

The sources you provide must correspond exactly to the binaries. In particular, you must make sure they are for the same version of the program—not an older version and not a newer version.

So, e.g. just put a link into an About-dialog of your program which should point to a server under your control or a versioning system like git (and probably github).

Be careful about what the other answer suggests:

just give a contact email for the source and auto reply with a link where you got the library from originally if you didn't modify it or a link to a zip in a dropbox with the modifications.

This is basically the opposite from what the GNU-FAQ says. It seems like you are not allowed to only provide the source code on request (maybe if you only distribute your binaries on request but certainly not if you provide them on a webpage). Most likely you will never get in trouble if you do what ratchet freak suggests, but that doesn't mean that it is the right way.

A linked entry about version control systems the the FAQ-section cited above, says:

Users should be provided with clear and convenient instructions for how to get the source for the exact object code they downloaded—they may not necessarily want the latest development code, after all.

So make sure you comply with this by, for example, specifying the program's current version number in the About-dialog and setting concurrent tags in the git repository.

And at the end the obligatory "I am not a lawyer" note ;)

2

LGPL say that you have to make it available, not that you must pass it along with every binary.

just give a contact email for the source and auto reply with a link where you got the library from originally if you didn't modify it or a link to a zip in a dropbox with the modifications.

  • So my plan is to put details about the used version and where it could be downloaded in my Readme. Should be enough if I understood you right. – MOnsDaR Apr 21 '14 at 23:42
  • 3
    @MOnsDaR: If you didn't make changes to the 3-rd party library, then that should indeed be enough, at least for practical purposes. Technically, if you distribute a binary of an (L)GPLv2 project, then the license makes you responsible to also provide the source code from the same location, but this is usually not enforced. – Bart van Ingen Schenau Apr 22 '14 at 10:33

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.