Dovrebbe essere sufficiente per leggere l'MPL .
3.2. If You distribute Covered Software in Executable Form then:
Such Covered Software must also be made available in Source Code Form, as described in Section 3.1, and You must inform recipients of the Executable Form how they can obtain a copy of such Source Code Form by reasonable means in a timely manner, at a charge no more than the cost of distribution to the recipient; and
You may distribute such Executable Form under the terms of this License, or sublicense it under different terms, provided that the license for the Executable Form does not attempt to limit or alter the recipients’ rights in the Source Code Form under this License.
3.3. Distribution of a Larger Work
- You may create and distribute a Larger Work under terms of Your choice, provided that You also comply with the requirements of this License for the Covered Software. If the Larger Work is a combination of Covered Software with a work governed by one or more Secondary Licenses, and the Covered Software is not Incompatible With Secondary Licenses, this License permits You to additionally distribute such Covered Software under the terms of such Secondary License(s), so that the recipient of the Larger Work may, at their option, further distribute the Covered Software under the terms of either this License or such Secondary License(s).
Quindi MPL non è virale nel senso che la GPL è. Il software MPL non può essere ri-licenziato con la propria licenza incompatibile, ma è possibile distribuirlo con qualsiasi altro codice sotto qualsiasi altra licenza fintanto che l'altra licenza non è in conflitto con MPL (come fa la GPL), e come a quando continui a distribuire la sorgente MPL.
Inoltre, se non stai distribuendo il software a nessuno, la discussione è discutibile, poiché non ti è richiesto di distribuire l'origine a nessuno a cui non distribuisci i binari.