DCDayDreamer wrote:Now, because the OpenSonic Dreamcast beta 1 release is using the GPLv2, and also the Dreamcast Allegro library, does this mean that the Dreamcast version of the Allegro library needed to compile the beta 1 source automatically falls under the same GPLv2? (because it IS required to compile the GPLv2 licensed OpenSonic source).
Back to my original question (with more questions): If the Dreamcast Allegro library does fall under the same GPLv2, who is responsible for releasing that source?, the OpenSonic port author?, or the original Allegro Dreamcast port author?.
The GPLv2 states that all code used in the production of binaries licensed under the GPLv2 must be provided. This can be done in one of three ways: distributing the binary and source together (the binary I downloaded certainly did not have the source to any part, nor the GPL license document, which must be included no matter how the source is distributed), distributing them separately but equally (i.e, two separate archives available on the same site (or linked to on the same site), but they must always be available together in this case), or by accompanying the binary with a written offer to obtain the source code by mail (only really applicable to binaries on a physical medium, such as a CD-ROM). Note that any of these only apply to those that have obtained a license for the binary, so the source may be withheld from anyone who does not have a valid license to the binary (so, it can be withheld from anyone who does not download the binary, for instance: you can require people to ask).
The GPLv2 states that ALL parts needed to build the EXACT binary must be either provided under a license compatible with the GPLv2 or must be something that is normally included with the compiler/operating system/interpreter in use. That is to say that everything must be available in a GPLv2-compatible license, effectively.
Distributing Allegro-DC in binary form is fine, as long as it is not linked in any manner (statically or dynamically) to a GPLed component. For instance, if the programs in question were licensed under the BSD license (of any type), then they'd be able to release without any source of anything (assuming the other components licenses also allowed), if they wanted. However, the issue at hand is that Open Sonic, and many other Allegro-DC ports, are licensed under the GPLv2, which is explicit in its requirements that the EXACT code used to create the binaries MUST be available, at least on demand, unless the component in question is normally distributed with the operating system or compiler (there's no interpreters involved here, so we can ignore that safely).
I assure you that Allegro-DC is not distributed in binary form with KOS (the operating system in question) or GCC (the compiler in question), so the GPL states that the source must be available. It is the responsibility of the person hosting the binary to make sure that the conditions are fulfilled, so in this case dreamcast.es is responsible for making the source available.