Am Samstag, 7. Oktober 2006 13:28 schrieb Per Inge Mathisen: > On 10/7/06, Dennis Schridde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Ok, I hope I got the general idea. Object if you see problems. > > > > 1. Write a LICENSE.TXT where is stated that the sourcecode (everything > > but data/) is GPL > > Everything but the original data. Any newly contributed data should be GPL. So best would be if we include a list of files we interpreted as being GPL and another list of files we know are GPL in the LICENSE.TXT? (Only for the data of course...) To make that easier, what about having a subdir data/original for which we state that it is interpreted and everything else in data/ is surely GPL?
> > 2. Write there also that the data is distributed under the GPL and we are > > not the copyright holders, but are coordinating with them "to ensure > > continued availability under the GPL" > > Can I suggest something along the lines of: > > "Concerning the license on the original data files: > > The literal meaning of the release statement is ambiguous in the case > of the original data that is included in the released package. Despite > several attempts to get a clarification, we have received no response. > > We have chosen to interpret the original release statement as putting > the original data under a GPL license. Since in the absence of a > license the released data could not be distributed, we find that > interpreting the license for the data as being under the same license > as the source to be the best interpretation to fit the intention > behind the release. > > Eidos, the game publisher, has been informed of our interpretation of > the license." Sounds good. > > 3. Supply the original readme.txt and reference it in the LICENSE.TXT > > 4. Wait if Frank/Virgil/Rman can make Mr. McLean say something > > 5. Else write Eidos a mail > > Sounds good. > > > 1: Shouldn't this LICENSE.TXT be part of the current COPYING file? Or > > should we really split that into a GPL file, a ORIGINAL_README and a > > LICENSE file? > > COPYING should be the master license file, if we follow the GNU style. > Then add COPYING.GPL and COPYING.WARNING, perhaps? In the latter we > could put a warning about the status of the data license, and a copy > of the original readme.txt. So the COPYING file would include what? "Sourcecode is GPL (see COPYING.GPL) ..." and the text you provided above, referencing COPYING.ORIGINAL or COPYING.WARNING or whatever? --Dennis
pgp6AM4u3wPM7.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Warzone-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
