meta user
network profile
| bio | website | jgraph.com |
|---|---|---|
| location | Northampton, United Kingdom | |
| age | 38 | |
| visits | member for | 2 years, 6 months |
| seen | 6 hours ago | |
| stats | profile views | 18 |
I'm the co-founder of JGraph, where we produce the JGraph and mxGraph graph visualization libraries and the draw.io diagramming application.
|
Jan 24 |
awarded | Autobiographer |
|
Nov 16 |
awarded | Yearling |
|
Sep 7 |
answered | Copyleft Licenses - Need to attribute? |
|
Mar 28 |
awarded | Commentator |
|
Mar 28 |
comment |
How is client-side javascript covered by the GPL? @vartec Don't want a flame war, but suggest you consult the FSF if you ever had such a case. Last comment for me. |
|
Mar 28 |
comment |
How is client-side javascript covered by the GPL? Yes, so you have delivered GPL code and your code for execution on someone's computer. The GPL applies in exactly the same way as if you delivered a piece of software the user installed and executed. |
|
Mar 28 |
comment |
How is client-side javascript covered by the GPL? @Alison, ah OK, sorry, I mis-understood the full question then. No, the server side would not have to be GPLed. As long as the comms between the client and server are some format unlike a machine level functional invocation, like XML, you have nothing to worry about. Simply serving GPL code, be it HTML or JS, doesn't make the server-side code delivering it, or communicating with it in a non-remote invocation format, a derivative work. |
|
Mar 28 |
comment |
How is client-side javascript covered by the GPL? The GPL is not limited to linking, anywhere you call the API of a GPLed method or function either on object code or directly on source code of an interpreted language causes the derivative work to have to be licensed under the GPL. Your point is entirely wrong, I'm afraid, and very dangerous, that usage does form a derivative work that falls under the GPL. |
|
Mar 28 |
comment |
How is client-side javascript covered by the GPL? @Scott Whitlock , the GPL clearly does not force you to release the server side code, I have to disagree there is any uncertainty there. Only the AGPL could enforce that. Overall, the FSF does answer GPL questions like these, it might be worth asking them if someone is relying on the answer to this. |
|
Mar 28 |
comment |
How is client-side javascript covered by the GPL? @Alison Unaltered. You could reasonably say you have fulfilled your requirement if the JavaScript is available by typing the URL to the JavaScript into a browser you see the unaltered JavaScript source. It would be safer to make it available as a download, though, for completeness. |
|
Mar 28 |
comment |
How is client-side javascript covered by the GPL? @objectiveME , it does not count unless the JS is unaltered. Both the GPL v2 and v3 have reasonably specific text about this. v3 is slightly clearer and has less room for misunderstandings. |
|
Mar 28 |
awarded | Editor |
|
Mar 28 |
revised |
Must source code released under GPL be human-readable? added 200 characters in body |
|
Mar 28 |
comment |
How is client-side javascript covered by the GPL? It has to be unaltered, both in GPL V2 and V3. OK, that may not be the same thing, I'm assuming human writable == human readable. |
|
Mar 28 |
answered | Must source code released under GPL be human-readable? |
|
Mar 28 |
answered | How is client-side javascript covered by the GPL? |
|
Mar 26 |
awarded | Critic |
|
Mar 26 |
comment |
How can I make feasible the deployment of my application on the servers You cross posted answers.onstartups.com/questions/22343/… and webapps.stackexchange.com/questions/13869/…. Not cool. |
|
Mar 19 |
awarded | Scholar |
|
Mar 19 |
accepted | What are the main programmers web sites in other countries? |
