[argyllcms] Re: Packaging aryllcms for distros, and licence incompatibilities

  • From: Graeme Gill <graeme@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 02:42:27 +1100

Richard Hughes wrote:

At the moment, different pieces of the source code have different
licences, which is far from ideal. This is /okay/ for Fedora, but the
way the licence changes have been done recently does not make it clear
what files are under what licence, and also introduces some licence

I can't agree with you there. The licensing is just as clear as
it has always been. There is a clear and accurate summary at the
top of the documentation, and each file and/or directory has
reference to its license.

For instance, there are now License.txt, License2.txt and License3.txt
files in spectro/. Does this mean that all the files without licence
headers have all three licences? Or no licence?

You will see that each source file makes reference to the corresponding
license file. Since there are various authors, I can't arbitrarily
change license on a few of the files. A quick grep shows which files
use which license.

In one specific example, spec2cie.c is GPLv2 licensed. This is linked
with libinsttypes which is created from libinsttypes.c which is
licensed under AGPLv3. AGPLv3 is not compatible with GPLv2.

You could well be right about that particular case. I'll see what
I can do to resolve these couple of cases before the next release.
In the short term you can simply omit the GPL2 files.

See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing for a easy to understand
guide on what licence is compatible with each other.

This doesn't seem to really talk about AGPLv3.

Graeme Gill.

Other related posts: