Curiously, I didn't find any reference in the Open source licences section of the codex app.

Is this a MPL 2.0 violation?

▲ zamadatix 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Despite the title, I'm not sure it's actually bundled. Some of the skills plugins will download it on the first run. So it depends where they are grabbing it from rather than the presence of the binary on the system, but I haven't checked that deep into where they actually grab it.

▲ TZubiri 8 hours ago | parent [-]

The license itself may be present in the cache folder.

Alternatively, ChatGPT might happily disclose authorship and licensing if asked.

I'm not convinced of the argument that the fact that it is not bundled at download or even at install-time, would free them of the GPL responsibilities. And at this point.

I'm also not sure HOW the devs bundled libreoffice, whether they just mentioned in a prompt (use libreoffice), or whether they hardcoded a command (like apt install libreoffice), more likely the former, considering the recursive vibecoding nature of this software.

Whole lotta words to say that I don't know whether this is a GPL violation, but interested in the answer. If it is a violation, the likely fix will probably be yet another prompt that says something like "comply with licensing", which probably already exists, so a more specific "provide attribution (in a way that doesn't bother the user)"

	▲	prmoustache 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		> Whole lotta words to say that I don't know whether this is a GPL violation, I don't need a lot of words to say it can't be a GPL violation since Libreoffice is distributed under the MPL v2.0 license. https://www.libreoffice.org/licenses/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/MPL/license-policy/
	▲	zamadatix 6 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		I finally did find the license in `~/.cache/codex-runtimes/codex-primary-runtime/dependencies/native/libreoffice-headless/libreoffice/LibreOfficeDev.app/Contents/Resources/LICENSE`

▲ thesdev 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

	▲	vb-8448 8 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Well, this one is particularly obvious, other one are more fuzzy.
	▲	throwaway613746 5 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		[dead]

▲ ars 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I think that depends on if they distribute it with the install package, or if they download it once installed.