On Thu, 2013-12-05 at 16:31 +0100, Petr Viktorin wrote: > On 12/05/2013 04:02 PM, Simo Sorce wrote: > > On Thu, 2013-12-05 at 15:38 +0100, Petr Vobornik wrote: > >> On 5.12.2013 15:34, Simo Sorce wrote: > >>> On Thu, 2013-12-05 at 15:29 +0100, Petr Vobornik wrote: > >>>> On 5.12.2013 14:09, Petr Viktorin wrote: > >>>>> On 12/03/2013 03:26 PM, Simo Sorce wrote: > >>>>>> Some tags escaped the relicensing we did a long time ago. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Simo. > >>>>> > >>>>> Looks good, ACK, pushed to: > >>>>> master: af26e6da4650b3a429af31bc38b546eff27e38c6 > >>>>> ipa-3-3: 9defb913aa65bfe9b423d510f340ae23b9e547f2 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> I grepped for some other occurences of "GPLv2": > >>>>> > >>>>> contrib/RHEL4/ipa-client.spec:7:License: GPLv2 > >>>>> do we still want to carry the RHEL4 stuff anyway? > >>>>> > >>>>> ipa-client/ipa-client.spec.in:7:License: GPLv2 > >>>>> Is ipa-client.spec used for anything any more? > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> install/ui/src/freeipa/package.json: > >>>>> "licenses": [{ > >>>>> "type": "GPLv3", > >>>>> "url": "http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.html" > >>>>> },{ > >>>>> "type": "GPLv2", > >>>>> "url": "http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html" > >>>>> }], > >>>>> Is this package dual-licensed? > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> It's because of: > >>>> git grep "Free Software Foundation; version 2" > >>>> install/ui/src/freeipa/aci.js: * published by the Free Software > >>>> Foundation; version 2 only > >>>> install/ui/test/aci_tests.js: * published by the Free Software > >>>> Foundation; version 2 only > >>>> install/ui/test/widget_tests.js: * published by the Free Software > >>>> Foundation; version 2 only > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> It's most likely a mistake and should be changed. > >>> > >>> Is that code really v2 only ? > >>> > >>> Or are you saying the "version 2 only" strings are mistakes ? > >>> > >>> Simo. > >>> > >> > >> It's our code. So IMO we should just change it to v3. > > > > I do not recall we ever used the v2 only variant, this is highly > > suspect, we should go through history and make sure it is all our code, > > then re-license it. > > If it is derived from v2 only code from an outside party though then we > > will need to ask for permission to change or strip the code out and > > rewrite it from scratch. > > > > Can someone check through git history and determine where the code comes > > from and how the "only" label got onto it ? > > There were Red Hat¹ contributors only so far: > > $ for file in > install/ui/{src/freeipa/aci.js,test/aci_tests.js,test/widget_tests.js}; > do git log --follow --raw $file; done | grep ^Author: | sort | uniq > Author: Adam Young <ayo...@redhat.com> > Author: Endi S. Dewata <edew...@redhat.com> > Author: Endi Sukma Dewata <edew...@redhat.com> > Author: Martin Kosek <mko...@redhat.com> > Author: Petr Vobornik <pvobo...@redhat.com> > Author: Petr VobornÃk <pvobo...@redhat.com> > > > The files come from these commits, with the "only" label already in them: > c281e786c805f400ca23d4412e29d396632d5441 widget unit tests > 07ace112afeaadade0ca372fe23a9432c2c9780f aci ui > > or without tracking renames: > b9ef6ab0c412913234f05f788b3fcd3c3277eb69 Move of core Web UI files to > AMD directory > b9ad279ad2d8d93dd501115a028783cf8fe7fcbd rename static to ui > c281e786c805f400ca23d4412e29d396632d5441 widget unit tests
Bringing Adam in the loop as he seem to be the original author. Adam, can you shed some light on this license issue ? Was it just a mistake on your part when you copied in the boiler plate ? Or was the code derived (and why no attribution if it was ?) Simo. -- Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York _______________________________________________ Freeipa-devel mailing list Freeipa-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/freeipa-devel