Notepad2i, The Story of Notepad3 Couple of days ago I've released a fork version of the last GPLd version of Notepad2 which was 1.0.12, released in 2004.
My modifications were:
The installation and the shell integration Refining and formatting the web documentation which was already exist in the Florin's web site, and associating it with the application. Replacing graphic items (icons/toolbars) Some little modifications in the executable program itself. I called My work "Notepad3", and I wrote the following in the "About" dialog box:
Notepad3 1.0 (c) [myname] [year] [myEmailAddress] [myWebsite] Notepad2 1.0.12 (c) Florian Balmar [year] [hisEmailAddress] [hisWebsite] The GPL 2.0 NoticeSo, What's the output? What I did exactly is "boxing" an old version of Florin's work in a "box" which is my work, with keeping Florian's copyright notice everywhere. In my opinion, this "box" promotes the popularity of Notepad2.
Why I called it "Notepad3"? When I want to release a parallel/fork version of any open source software, I can't give it the same name, because online software databases use the name of the software as the primary key.
Notepad2 is the name of Florian's work, "2" is a part of its name, not a version number, and that's why I thought of using "Notepad3".
Notepad = simplicity Notepad2 = simplicity + syntax highlighting Notepad3 = simplicity + syntax highlighting + installation/documentation The questions My question is: Am I broking GPL 2.0? Do I do anything wrong legally or ethically?
This question will lead to several questions:
What's software? Code/compiled code?, or Code + Documentation + Installation If the first:
Do little modifications made for specific software deserves a copyright notice? If the second:
Does the (About) dialog represent the executable program or the product as a whole: executable + documentation + installation In my opinion, it deserves, but I understand and I think that there should be a way to distinguish between the big efforts and the little efforts, and I thing that this is a common problem in open source community.
And I think that (About) dialog represents the product as a whole: executable + documentation + installation
I directed these question to GNU mailing list to check if I did something wrong, but I've got no serious answer.
But anyway, and whatever my opinion was about the argument, I'd like to apologize to Florian for any non-intended hurt that I might cause to his great work, and I actually renamed my work to Notepad2i, and I removed all copyright notices which refers to my name.
