Mon Sep 19 08:23:27 2016: Request 117955 was acted upon.
Transaction: Correspondence added by RSCHUPP
       Queue: Module-ScanDeps
     Subject: LICENSE does not agree with lib/Module/
   Broken in: 1.22
    Severity: (no value)
       Owner: Nobody
      Status: new
 Ticket <URL: >

Am 2016-09-19 05:55:44, jplesnik schrieb:
> Module-ScanDeps-1.22 has weird license declaration. While LICENSE file
> quotes Artistic 2.0 license, lib/Module/  (and other
> module) files declares "same terms as Perl itself" and that means GPL+
> or Artistic 1 (see
> The current wordings implies that lib/Module/ (and other
> module) files are covered by GPL+ or Artistic 1 licenses and the other
> files like wip/ are covered by Artistic 2.0 license.
> Is that really what the author wants?

Who knows? I'm just the maintainer, not the original author.
There was no separate LICENSE file until I moved Module::ScanDeps, PAR and 
PAR::Packer to GitHub. I agree that I picked the wrong LICENSE with
the current "Artistic 2.0".
What do you think about something like

(without "This software is copyright (c) 1995 by Gisle Aas.", obviously).

Note that the wording

  This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
  under the same terms as Perl itself.

  See L<> 

in the source (and original README) is already ambiguous, as the given
link (nowadays) points to "Artistic 1.0", NOT to Larry Wall's 
original statement (as given in

Cheers, Roderich

Reply via email to