https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2414840



--- Comment #21 from Phil Wyett <[email protected]> ---
(In reply to Ben Beasley from comment #20)
> The license situation here is weird.
> 
> COPYING is GPLv3
> 
> COPYING.LESSER is LGPLv3
> 
> ChangeLog has:
> 
> > 2023-11-28  Daniel Price <[email protected]>
> > 
> >         * COPYING, LICENSE: changed license to LGPL3
> 
> And docs/index.html has:
> 
> > Giza is currently distributed under the <a 
> > href="https://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-3.0.html";>LGPL license</a>.
> 
> But all of the source file still have this header:
> 
> > /* giza - a scientific plotting library built on cairo
> >  *
> >  * Copyright (c) 2010      James Wetter and Daniel Price
> >  * Copyright (c) 2010-2012 Daniel Price
> >  *
> >  * This library is free software; and you are welcome to redistribute
> >  * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License
> >  * (GPL, see LICENSE file for details) and the provision that
> >  * this notice remains intact. If you modify this file, please
> >  * note section 5a) of the GPLv3 states that:
> >  *
> >  *  a) The work must carry prominent notices stating that you modified
> >  *  it, and giving a relevant date.
> >  *
> >  * This software is distributed "AS IS", with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY.
> >  * See the GPL for specific language governing rights and limitations.
> >  *
> >  * The Original code is the giza plotting library.
> >  *
> >  * Contributor(s):
> >  *      James Wetter <[email protected]>
> >  *      Daniel Price <[email protected]> (main contact)
> >  */
> 
> which is GPLv3, probably GPL-3.0-only in SPDX terms since there is no “or
> any later version” language, although it’s a slightly ambiguous notice.
> However, there is an unusual extra bit here:
> 
> > and the provision that this notice remains intact.
> 
> which probably needs to be reviewed in
> https://gitlab.com/fedora/legal/fedora-license-data/-/issues.
> 
> From https://github.com/danieljprice/giza/pull/69, upstream seems to have
> the impression that they can include GPL-licensed sources in a library and
> still call it LGPL overall. I don’t find this convincing, and would probably
> call it “LGPL-3.0-only AND GPL-3.0-only”, subject to review of the “and the
> provision that this notice remains intact” language. I see nothing that
> indicates a disjunctive choice of licenses, so I don’t think “LGPL-3.0-only
> or GPL-3.0-only” is correct.
> 
> The files src/*.pc.in have this license:
> 
> > # This file is free software; as a special exception the author gives
> > # unlimited permission to copy and/or distribute it, with or without
> > # modifications, as long as this notice is preserved.
> > #
> > # This file is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
> > # WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law; without even the
> > # implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
> 
> which seems like a close enough match for FSFULLRWD,
> https://spdx.org/licenses/FSFULLRWD.html. Since the .pc files generated from
> these are installed in the -devel subpackage, the -devel subpackage should
> have a corresponding license term, like:
> 
> # .pc files are FSFULLRWD
> License: LGPL-3.0-only AND GPL-3.0-only AND FSFULLRWD

I have created a bug upstream asking the upstream developer Daniel t enter this
discussion and I hope we can resolve any issues.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2414840

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202414840%23c21

-- 
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Reply via email to