Follow-up Comment #14, task #16666 (group administration): Thanks Ineiev,
>> And finally, there is one file which I generated and edited, the >> Doxyfile.in. > If I understand it correctly, that command copies parts of its package to the > output. The copyright holder and the license is inherited from those parts > of the package (unless the package provides some kind of exception for such > generated files). So I have a licensing problem, right? Because I'm including a file with a GPL license in a package with an Expat license. As you said while talking about valgrind: > The least permissive license is the GPL; its requirements effectively include > the requirements of other licenses used, so the resulting terms are > essentially the GPL. Then, I made a mistake by generating the file with `doxygen -g`. Instead, I should have written the file by myself. So I did, I generated a new Doxyfile file with only the parameters needed, keeping the copyright (myself) and the licence (expat). Also, the [https://github.com/doxygen/doxygen/blob/master/src/doxygen.cpp#L11 doxyfile.cpp file] says that the documents produced are not affected by the doxygen's license. And the link you provided says so too: > The output of a program is not, in general, covered by the copyright on the > code of the program. Can you list which other issues are preventing my project to be accepted by Savannah? Also, what about the project history in my git repository, which has commits that were not properly licenced-copyrighted? AFAIK no one visits it apart from you and me, but should I remove that history and re-upload it so that each commit has a valid licence+copyright? Best regards. _______________________________________________________ Reply to this item at: <https://savannah.nongnu.org/task/?16666> _______________________________________________ Message sent via Savannah https://savannah.nongnu.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
