GPL not a EULA?

[Lachlan Patrick]

Ben Finney wrote:
> Lachlan Patrick <loki at research.canon.com.au> writes:
> 
>> Just installing BZR on Windows. The installer says "You must accept
>> the terms of this agreement [the GPL] before continuing..."
> 
> The installer is wrong, or the license of the code is not GPL. There
> is no requirement to "accept" the GPL to use a work licensed under it.

Well, it probably doesn't do too much harm. I'm just worried it might
hinder corporate uptake of bzr if people don't understand its scope.

> If the program is interactive, there *is* a requirement to make the
> user *aware* of the license terms.

Yes, I was thinking the installer could display it and say "This applies
to bzr code, not your code or documents", and the user just clicks Next.

>> Just wanted to clarify the intent of requiring people to agree to the
>> GPL in the installer? Ta.
> 
> I would guess that you should ask the people who made the installer to
> take out that step.

They don't read this list? Is there somewhere else I should post this?

Loki