The author Eugene Gavrilov says the drivers are GPL2:
Code seems to be GPL2-covered.
However, I don't understand what he means by this:
It seems that my mailbox has been hacked, and now the full kX source code has become available online on github. The hacker has also written a nice readme file, which covers kX build process etc.
He doesn't seem worried about it, is he joking, or does it is indeed true that he was hacked, but he approves the code being on github?
That forum post seems a little strange, but if you go to the website you will find that the links to the license point to the GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE.
Please keep the Windows classic 9x/2000 look and feel.
The layman's guides - debugging - bug reporting - compiling - ISO remaster.
They may help you with a problem, so do have a look at them.
All source code is Copyright (c) Eugene Gavrilov, 2001-2014, unless specified otherwise.
The code can be re-distributed under GPL v2, unless specified otherwise.
The author Eugene Gavrilov says the drivers are GPL2:
Code seems to be GPL2-covered.
However, I don't understand what he means by this:
It seems that my mailbox has been hacked, and now the full kX source code has become available online on github. The hacker has also written a nice readme file, which covers kX build process etc.
He doesn't seem worried about it, is he joking, or does it is indeed true that he was hacked, but he approves the code being on github?
Look at the happy faces and such, he is just joking. Anyway, if you have doubts about it, you should just ask him
PurpleGurl wrote:I'd be careful here lest his email be compromised and it is a hacker who released it, not the author.
He was clearly joking. I guess this shows what happens if one makes a joke: there are always some who take it seriously, and then it leads a life on it's own.
Read up on the forum there: it's clear the author himself placed it under the GPL.
PurpleGurl wrote:I'd be careful here lest his email be compromised and it is a hacker who released it, not the author.
He was clearly joking. I guess this shows what happens if one makes a joke: there are always some who take it seriously, and then it leads a life on it's own.
Read up on the forum there: it's clear the author himself placed it under the GPL.
I did read the whole forum. Imagine that. And someone else could have still posed as him. I only said to be careful.
PurpleGurl wrote:I'd be careful here lest his email be compromised and it is a hacker who released it, not the author.
He was clearly joking. I guess this shows what happens if one makes a joke: there are always some who take it seriously, and then it leads a life on it's own.
Read up on the forum there: it's clear the author himself placed it under the GPL.
I did read the whole forum. Imagine that. And someone else could have still posed as him. I only said to be careful.
He was a regular there; it's extremely unlikely, if he had been 'spoofed', that he would not have let it be removed, or at least would have reacted to it. Conversely, there would be no reason for a spoofer to tell he had been hacked, nor for the original author to let it stand if the GPL'ing weren't true. Nor for him to make smileys about it (indicating the humoristic nature of it). And besides all that, it's mentioned on the copying-readme of the project itself too.
It's good to be cautious, but there is no reason to be paranoid. It's GPL v2.