Licensing question regarding redistribution of Pake-generated applications

[Ali-Hegazy-Ai]

Hi,

I'm creating a small GitHub project called WhatsAppLite.

The repository contains:

• A README with build instructions
• A PowerShell build script
• An icon

Users can build the application themselves using Pake.

I am also considering publishing a prebuilt Windows executable in GitHub Releases as a convenience for users who do not want to install the build dependencies.

The application is simply a wrapper around https://web.whatsapp.com/ generated with Pake. I am not modifying Pake itself.

My questions are:

1. Does distributing a prebuilt executable generated by Pake create any GPL-3.0 source-distribution obligations for me?
2. If so, what source code must be provided?
3. Is it sufficient to provide the build script and generation instructions, or should the generated Tauri project also be published?
4. Are there any attribution or license-notice requirements you recommend for projects distributing Pake-generated applications?

Thank you.

[Sampath7890]

Good questions — the short answer is: you're covered, and your obligations are minimal, but here's the precise breakdown:
The key fact: Pake recently relicensed from MIT to GPL-3.0, but simultaneously shipped a separate Pake Output Exception (LICENSE-EXCEPTION). The README explicitly states: "apps you build with Pake are entirely yours to use and distribute." The Output Exception is specifically designed so that GPL copyleft does not propagate to apps generated by Pake — similar to how GCC's runtime library exception works.
Your specific questions:

Does distributing a prebuilt .exe create GPL source-distribution obligations? No — the Output Exception explicitly exempts generated apps from GPL's copyleft requirements.
What source must be provided? None for the generated app itself. If you were distributing a modified version of Pake itself, you'd need to provide source — but you're not; you're just using it as a tool.
Is your build script + README sufficient? Yes, and that's actually better practice than strictly required. Publishing your PowerShell script and instructions is the right move.
Attribution recommendations? Not legally required under the exception, but the README asks: "If you fork Pake into your own product, give it a different name and credit Pake as the source." Since you're not forking Pake but using it as a tool, even this doesn't strictly apply. A one-line mention in your README like "Built with Pake" is a courteous acknowledgment and nothing more.

One separate thing to check: wrapping web.whatsapp.com in a redistributable app may have implications under WhatsApp's Terms of Service (not a Pake/GPL concern, but worth reading their ToS before publishing the prebuilt exe publicly).
(I'm not a lawyer — for high-stakes distribution decisions, a legal professional is worth consulting, but the above reflects what the license files explicitly say.)