GUI goodness for your Mouse and Keyboard programming

[Gilles Gravier]

Hi!

Actually, I need to clarify a few more things... which seem unclear to
Cybe... (see below about licenses, in particular).

Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
> Young <tuxman at knology.net>  said:
>   
>> http://www.hidpoint.com/home.html
>>
>> HIDPoint can be considered as a Linux version of Logitech’s or 
>> Microsoft’s Keyboard and Mouse configuration software...
>>     
>
> I'm not seeing any source code anywhere.  Now, I'm not an open source
> zealot but if the product /isn't/ open source then your mail to this
> mailing list is spam and you a spammer.
>   
Your post definitely DID sound like a zealot, though you probably didn't
mean it that way. I'm going to work under that assumption. :)
> Besides, if it's not open source and admittedly uses open source
> software as indicated on the credits page you may be more than a
> spammer, you may be a criminal.
>   
First, the original poster is not necessarily from hidpoint.com (so he's
not necessarily the criminal).

Second, if they use open source software, they may have full rights to
re-use it, if the original license provides for it. Not all open source
is GPL licensed. CDDL (OpenSolaris), BSD, MPL (Mozilla) to name a few
all allow re-use of code. Even in closed source environments, even in
commercial products, provided that a link to download the ORIGINAL (not
necessarily the modified - CDDL / BSD) source code. That link may be on
their site... like Linksys does for their GPL-based products.

Third, I note, after installing the software, that past the
installation, the software than procedes to DOWNLOAD drivers. In terms
of, say, GPL license, this means that additional downloaded software
isn't considered BUNDLED software. It's not part of the original PROJECT
code. So they could have a completely proprietary application with a
nice installer... and that application could then download perfectly
GPLed drivers... and all they'd have to provide source code for
(possibly just in the form of a link on their site, again) would be the
drivers, but not their proprietary code. GPL only concerns code that is
linked into an original GPL project. By using a separate download of
code, they segment their stuff into separate projects, thus breaking the
GPL link.

Of course, they could also use LGPL code, in which case, provided they
link to it in the ways supported and described in the license, then they
can bundle that LGPL code and only have to provide source for that part,
not the rest.

As you can see, it's VERY possible. In fact, VERY COMMON, to bundle open
source and non open source code in ways that aren't infringing on the
orignial open source license.
> Please respond, I'd like for you to clear this all up.
>   
I hope I've helped clarify a significant part.

Gilles.