Tue Sep 20 03:20:00 2016: Request 117955 was acted upon.
Transaction: Correspondence added by jplesnik
       Queue: Module-ScanDeps
     Subject: LICENSE does not agree with lib/Module/ScanDeps.pm
   Broken in: 1.22
    Severity: (no value)
       Owner: Nobody
  Requestors: jples...@redhat.com
      Status: open
 Ticket <URL: https://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=117955 >


On Mon Sep 19 08:23:27 2016, RSCHUPP wrote:
> 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/ScanDeps.pm  (and other
> > module) files declares "same terms as Perl itself" and that means
> > GPL+
> > or Artistic 1 (see http://dev.perl.org/licenses/).
> >
> > The current wordings implies that lib/Module/ScanDeps.pm (and other
> > module) files are covered by GPL+ or Artistic 1 licenses and the
> > other
> > files like wip/scan_dlls.pl 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
> 
> https://github.com/libwww-perl/libwww-perl/blob/master/LICENSE
This license file is ok. 

> (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<http://www.perl.com/perl/misc/Artistic.html>

The link should be replace by http://dev.perl.org/licenses/ to reference the 
license correctly. 


> 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 http://dev.perl.org/licenses/).
> 
> Cheers, Roderich



Reply via email to