I dug into this a bit. We use FreeSWITCH at my day job, so I'm certainly interested in this sort of thing. I'm not a lawyer either, though.

In this particular case, I see @coppice-git's point that these are basically math data tables. Personally, I don't think it's a problem in this particular case.

That said, the _ideal_ situation would be for the copyright holder to explicitly clarify the situation. My recommendation would be:

Best: Change the make_*.c files to be LGPL.

Good: Change the make_*.c files to put some permissive license grant into the files. This is the gcc/autoconf/bison exception approach, more-or-less. @coppice-git offered this (possibly with some snark intended) in:

Looking at the history of these files, as a practical matter, if @coppice-git consented, I'd probably call that good enough.

If I were you, I'd respond to that last comment with something like:

I see your point about these being data tables. However, Debian can be a stickler for copyright. If you were to make the tools put an LGPL header in the generated data files, that would eliminate any doubt, which would be helpful to me on the Debian side.


Attachment: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to