Using a GPL tool in one's build process - is documentation required?

I do not think using a GPL-licensed build tool places any restrictions on how you distribute the resulting software.

A lot of commercial software is created using gcc, and they do not need to do anything because of that (not even telling the users what compiler they used).

For open-source software, unless the tool used is very uncommon (and maybe even then) you can fulfill your requirement to make the source available by just making the source (including build scripts) available, without going to great lengths to make it easier for anyone to get all the build tools and their environment set up (although you should of course do that).

Here is the relevant section from the GPL (emphasis added)

The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable. However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable.

Would a link to the website and their Git repository suffice for "make the source code available" or do I actually have to download their repository and include it in my source package?

Jake Petroules 2010-08-12 08:07:26

Link to source repositories are good enough (even for your own software) as long as it is publicly accessible. GPL FAQ: "This is acceptable as long as the source checkout process does not become burdensome or otherwise restrictive." http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#SourceInCVS

Thilo 2010-08-12 08:11:09

Now, if the tool does not include any object code (say, it's just bash scripts or PHP) then you basically need to do nothing since it's all there in the first place?

Jake Petroules 2010-08-12 08:21:28

If the tool is a script, you must need to make sure it's accompanied by a copy of the GPL. You should also make sure you don't claim ownership of or restrict the GPL component in any way - whilst that sounds obvious, I have seen many people add a top level readme in their software that says "The entire contents of this software package are (C) OurCompany Ltd and may not be distributed without our permission" - an "except the parts flagged as GPL" clause is important!

JosephH 2010-08-12 11:48:27

You would have to at least include a copy of the GPL license, and if not including the source code for the tool, you would usually need to include an offer to supply the source code alongside the tool, assuming commercial distribution.

JosephH 2010-08-12 11:51:37

@Joseph The license would come along with the files comprising the tool, or at least it would for all GNU tools I've used.

anon 2010-08-12 11:53:43

Yes, usually. You have to remember to include it though, especially if you've pulled one tool out of a package that included several tools. The 'offer to supply source code' needs to be modified/created to be correct (unless the source code is included in the same package as the binary).

JosephH 2010-08-12 12:14:40

ansaurus

tags:

views:

answers:

Using a GPL tool in one's build process - is documentation required?

related questions