You can't modify a software licence by putting up a separate web page talking about it, and in any case I think you're misinterpreting the meaning of those paragraphs. They are clarifying that the intention is that even those who have received the code and offer indirectly are entitled to make use of the after-the-event source provision mechanism. However what the licence *says* (GPLv2) is that any third party is entitled to use the mechanism.

The relevant section changes in GPLv3 and then only those holding the binaries are entitled to request the source, but the piece of software under discussion we are told is GPLv2.

Not sure where confidence comes into it - I made it perfectly clear I was the same person, just not using the same computer. Had I pretended to be someone else then you might have had a point.

I did in fact re-read both versions of the text to check my recollection (which was correct) before posting.

Err, no. In the context of the point under discussion entirely correct.

If you bothered to read the thread before posting you wouldn't make such a fool of yourself.

The issue under discussion is the obligations which you put yourself under by distributing binaries without source. The earlier (incorrect) assertion was that you only need to offer source to those to whom you have given binaries. Under the GPLv2, you need to make the offer to everyone, and under v3, to anyone who has got the binaries.

Yes, if you distribute them both together in the first place then you don't have either obligation, but that wasn't the issue.

HTH

Why is it that so many people pontificate on the GPL without bothering to read it first? Both v2 and v3 of the GPL make it very clear that you must offer the source code to anyone who asks for it. (Actually, v3 restricts it to people who've managed to get the object code, but they don't have to have got it from you.)

Microsoft must take a lot of the blame for the confusion in the public mind between "The Internet" and "The World Wide Web". By calling their web browser "Internet Explorer" they misled a lot of people right from the start. Yes, you can use it to access stuff other than web sites, but for most beginners, the fact that the tool was called Internet Explorer meant it was obvious that "The Internet" was the thing they were browsing.

When they first introduced roundabouts to France, this was the default priority - traffic in the roundabout had to give way to traffic entering the roundabout. Apparently they were trying to make it work like their archaic "priorite a droite" (sorry, can't do the accents) rule. They quickly realised how stupid it was and now just about every roundabout sports "Vous n'avez pas la priorite" signs on the approach roads.

You still have to be very careful when driving in France, in case you hit one of the few isolated spots where "Priorite a droite" still applies. Usually this is right in the very centre of a town, or else out in the depths of the countryside. It's almost got worse now it's so rare, precisely because it is rare. Peasant on a tractor pulling out onto a road in front of a speeding lorry and pleading "Priorite a droite" anyone?

http://www.debian.org/

For it to be a real, mechanical 'off' switch it needs to be on the right hand side of the machine, almost at the back. It also needs to be red.

Or about punctuation.

Perhaps he's like Windows... ...he'll only start to become useful at version 3.1