Joined: Feb. 2007
||Posted: June 18 2008,19:59
I'm asking this for my own curiosity.
Are you more upset that someone had changed your GPL'ed code to suit their *own* needs or that the sources, copyright notices, etc., need to be made available per the terms of the GPL?
If it's the latter, have you tried to deal with this behind the scenes to get that taken care of? Have you ordered a set of DSL sources yet to see if the latest sources are included? The notice for sources is both on the CD and in the download directory. Will you be satisfied with the inclusion of appropriate copyright notices? And if you've been as familiar with DSL and DSL's use of your bindings as you suggest, why is it just now an issue that sources/copyrights have heretofore not been included?
If it's just the former, what's the problem? The GPL allows people to see the code, change the code, use the code, redistribute the code (per the terms of the GPL). If you don't want anyone using your project to suit their own needs, you need to change your license to something a bit more proprietary that will yield you the kind of control it appears you want (e.g., things you won't "support or condone here or elsewhere").
edited some grammar :-)
"It felt kind of like having a pitbull terrier on my rear end."
-- meo (copyright(c)2008, all rights reserved)