Ok. Would you and Nicolas make the changes as appropriate? I'll hold off on a release after you both go over this. Thanks.
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 8:35 AM, Robert Kausch <[email protected]> wrote: > Had a look at libcdio again and realized it's GPL only. > > In that case, I think we should go the other way and make libcdio-paranoia > GPL only as well. It cannot be used without libcdio anyway so anything > using it would have to be GPL anyway. The LGPL option for libcdio-paranoia > does not really make sense in that case. > > Robert > > Am 25.09.2014 um 14:27 schrieb Robert Kausch: > > Hi Rocky, >> >> I had a look at the licenses of cdparanoia 10.2 and cdio-paranoia source >> files. >> >> In cdparanoia, the only files that carry a GPL license are cachetest.c >> and main.c (which would be cd-paranoia.c in cdio-paranoia). Everything >> else, including the whole library, is LGPL licensed. >> >> In cdio-paranoia about half the files are GPL, the other half LGPL. I >> think this is because the license of cdparanoia used to be the GPL until >> svn revision 14871. In revision 14872, they changed the license to LGPL, >> but that switch was never made in cdio-paranoia. >> >> As cdio-paranoia is now based on the latest cdparanoia release which, >> except for the two files mentioned above, is LGPL licensed, we could change >> the license to LGPL as well. Only the cd-paranoia tool would still have to >> be GPL licensed. >> >> Tell me what you think. >> >> Robert >> >> Am 15.09.2014 um 13:43 schrieb Rocky Bernstein: >> >>> My intent was to make this identical to >>> http://downloads.xiph.org/releases/cdparanoia/ >>> cdparanoia-III-10.2.src.tgz >>> from https://www.xiph.org/paranoia/down.html >>> >>> I may have botched things though. If there are discrepancies, I'd >>> appreciate it if you or others would fix and make a pull request off of >>> the >>> git repository https://github.com/rocky/libcdio-paranoia >>> >>> I see that doc/FAQ.txt isn't in the source mentioned above. So maybe we >>> remove that file? >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 5:56 AM, Nicolas Boullis <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Rocky, >>>> >>>> On Mon, Sep 08, 2014 at 05:17:26AM -0400, Rocky Bernstein wrote: >>>> >>>>> Lastly, the doc/FAQ.txt file has a copyright notice, with the "All >>>>> rights reserved." sentence. Isn't it non-free? >>>>> >>>> Sorry for bothering you, but do you have an opinion on this one? >>>> I cannot start the Debian transition to libcdio 0.92 (or the upcoming >>>> 0.93) without packages for libcdio-paranoia, and I cannot ship a >>>> non-free documentation within Debian main. >>>> Do you have a reason to think this file is free? Or should I use a >>>> stripped-down tarball? >>>> >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Nicolas >>>> >>>> >> >> > >
