Yair K. wrote: > On Monday 02 June 2008 21:37:13 Hannu Savolainen wrote: > >> Romain Beauxis wrote: >> >>> Le Monday 02 June 2008 04:04:51 Hannu Savolainen, vous avez écrit : >>> >>> >>>>> First of all, concerning the licence: >>>>> * Is it the whole code GPLed ? (naive question) >>>>> I mean that even if the global licence is GPL, there could be other parts >>>>> which are not GPL. This could also include the documentation that could >>>>> be GFDL for instance.. Those licencing questions are very important for >>>>> an inclusion, and often thake time to check (and are really boring too), >>>>> so your help is welcome here :) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> There are some closed source packages in OSS but they are not included >>>> in the tarballs. So all drivers included in the GPL source package are >>>> under GPL. Some header files and/or sample programs may be under the BSD >>>> license but all this code is for user land only. >>>> >>>> >>> Well, that's what I was afraid of.. The debian/copyright file has to report >>> each file's licence if it differs from main licence. I means I'll have to >>> go >>> through each of them to check the licence.. >>> >>> >> There is no need for that. Just don't include anything that is located >> under the tutorials/ or utils/ subdirectories. All the other files are >> under GPL. >> > > What about include/soundcard.h? > soundcard.h is under GPL too. However in the hg tree it says released under BSD.
All the #define COPYINGn lines in the golden source tree (hg) will be replaced by the actual GPL/CDDL/BSD license when the source tarballs are cut. Most other files in the hg tree say "All rights reserved" for the same reason. Best regards, Hannu _______________________________________________ oss-devel mailing list oss-devel@mailman.opensound.com http://mailman.opensound.com/mailman/listinfo/oss-devel
