On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 11:38:05AM -0800, Alan Irwin wrote: > On 2011-11-30 11:11-0000 Andrew Ross wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 04:54:27PM -0700, Orion Poplawski wrote: > >> plplot.i686: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/plplot-5.9.9/README.release > >> plplot.i686: E: incorrect-fsf-address > >> /usr/share/doc/plplot-5.9.9/COPYING.LIB > >> plplot-octave.i686: E: incorrect-fsf-address > >> /usr/share/plplot_octave/struct_contains.m > > > > I agree with you Orion that this should probably be fixed. I recently > > fixed up Copyright for the same reason (wrong address) as Debian lintian > > complained about it. Debian doesn't install COPYING.LIB. I maintains > > central copies of the GPL licenses and links to these so I didn't fix > > COPYING.LIB as well. > > In my rush, I misread some license dates at FSF and got confused by > that into thinking we might have an even later LGPL version 2 license > than published by FSF. But in fact our 2.0 license is much earlier > (June 1991 not June 1999), than theirs (February 1999, see > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/lgpl-2.1.html). Furthermore, > I have never heard anybody quibble about 2.0 versus 2.1 licensing text > so, Andrew, please go ahead and change to LGPL 2.1 so long as you make > sure to get the definitive version from FSF. > > Note there are some other licensing consistency issues you should > address. For example, the licensing summary that appears in our > source code (e.g., src/plcore.c) refers to LGPL version 2, but the > definitive version of that licensing summary( > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/lgpl-2.1.html#SEC4) refers to > version 2.1. There are possibly other inconsistencies as well between > the src/plcore.c licensing summary and the definitive version, and > certainly inconsisentencies between the LGPL licensing summary for > src/plcore.c and our other source files. > > So I think what is needed here is a wholesale approach to replace our > existing LGPL summaries everywhere in our source code files with the > definitive 2.1 version from the above URL. That change would be a > pain to do by hand, but I trust you should be able to automate the > work by using a find command and appropriate xargs and grep -l to find > all files in our source tree that include some version of the LGPL > summary. Then for each of those files run a perl script to recognize > the lines in the text that contain an existing variation of our > licensing summary (by the first few words and last few words of that > text to beat line-wrapping and other variations) and replace that text > by the definitive version that has the correct comment tag ("//" for C > code, "#" for Python code, etc.)
To start with I have just copied the Debian LGPL-2 (not 2.1) license to replace the current COPYING.LIB. This does not change the terms of the license at all, merely the FSF address. Switching to version 2.1 would result in a small change in the license, so I've avoided doing this. Now to go through the source files and check for inconsistency elsewhere. Andrew ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d _______________________________________________ Plplot-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/plplot-devel
