Your message dated Sun, 10 Nov 2013 18:39:47 +0100
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: Bug#569642: doxygen: Please clarify license
has caused the Debian Bug report #569642,
regarding doxygen: Please clarify license
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
569642: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=569642
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: doxygen
Version: 1.6.2+20100208-0.1
Severity: wishlist
Tags: upstream
Hi Matthias,
The debian/copyright file for doxygen is currently a bit confusing:
- It says that the license does not apply to various things, which
would mean one has less freedom to use those things, though I
suspect that is not intended;
- It refers to the “GNU General Public License” without specifying
which version.
Both issues reflect what the upstream copyright notice and license grant
says; for example, from doxygen.cpp:
* Copyright (C) 1997-2010 by Dimitri van Heesch.
*
* Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software and its
* documentation under the terms of the GNU General Public License is hereby
* granted. No representations are made about the suitability of this software
* for any purpose. It is provided "as is" without express or implied warranty.
* See the GNU General Public License for more details.
*
* Documents produced by Doxygen are derivative works derived from the
* input used in their production; they are not affected by this license.
Would it be possible to clarify these things with upstream? Ideally, I
would like this to say
Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software and its
documentation is hereby granted under the terms of the GNU General Public
License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2, or
(at your option) any later version. No representations are made about
the suitability of this software for any purpose. It is provided "as is"
without express or implied warranty. See LICENSE for more details.
Documents produced by Doxygen are copyright the authors of the input used
in their production. You can do whatever you want with portions that come
from Doxygen.
though if something else is intended (GPL-2 only?), that is fine, too.
Thoughts?
Jonathan
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Version: 1.8.5-1
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 07:10:53PM -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> The debian/copyright file for doxygen is currently a bit confusing:
>
> - It says that the license does not apply to various things, which
> would mean one has less freedom to use those things, though I
> suspect that is not intended;
>
> - It refers to the ???GNU General Public License??? without specifying
> which version.
>
> Both issues reflect what the upstream copyright notice and license grant
> says; for example, from doxygen.cpp:
I rewrote debian/copyright in dep5 notation and it does not clarify the
license version.
> * Copyright (C) 1997-2010 by Dimitri van Heesch.
> *
> * Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software and its
> * documentation under the terms of the GNU General Public License is hereby
> * granted. No representations are made about the suitability of this software
> * for any purpose. It is provided "as is" without express or implied
> warranty.
> * See the GNU General Public License for more details.
> *
> * Documents produced by Doxygen are derivative works derived from the
> * input used in their production; they are not affected by this license.
>
> Would it be possible to clarify these things with upstream? Ideally, I
> would like this to say
>
> Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software and its
> documentation is hereby granted under the terms of the GNU General Public
> License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2, or
> (at your option) any later version. No representations are made about
> the suitability of this software for any purpose. It is provided "as is"
> without express or implied warranty. See LICENSE for more details.
>
> Documents produced by Doxygen are copyright the authors of the input used
> in their production. You can do whatever you want with portions that come
> from Doxygen.
>
> though if something else is intended (GPL-2 only?), that is fine, too.
This was forwarded to upstream as
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=701094
There Dimitri van Heesch wrote:
| - It says that the license does not apply to various things, which
| would mean one has less freedom to use those things, though I
| suspect that is not intended;
|
| Your proposal is exactly the same as the license states only in less formal
| wording. If you, as a user, have the freedom to use any license you want for
| you input and doxygen's output, that gives you more freedom than if you have
to
| comply with the GPL, so it provides more freedom not less.
|
| - It refers to the "GNU General Public License" without specifying
| which version (your website link however to GPL2)
|
| The LICENSE file that comes with doxygen clearly specifies it is version 2 of
| the GPL license. I don't see the need to repeat this in every source file.
As you can see upstream does not concur with your suggestion. There is
nothing Debian can do about this issue. Thus closing.
Helmut
--- End Message ---
