While checking the contents of our `perl' package, I noticed the following:
/* NOTE: this is derived from Henry Spencer's regexp code, and should not
* confused with the original package (see point 3 below). Thanks, Henry!
/* Additional note: this code is very heavily munged from Henry's version
* in places. In some spots I've traded clarity for efficiency, so don't
* blame Henry for some of the lack of readability.
/* The names of the functions have been changed from regcomp and
* regexec to pregcomp and pregexec in order to avoid conflicts
* with the POSIX routines of the same names.
* pregcomp and pregexec -- regsub and regerror are not used in perl
* Copyright (c) 1986 by University of Toronto.
* Written by Henry Spencer. Not derived from licensed software.
* Permission is granted to anyone to use this software for any
* purpose on any computer system, and to redistribute it freely,
* subject to the following restrictions:
* 1. The author is not responsible for the consequences of use of
* this software, no matter how awful, even if they arise
* from defects in it.
* 2. The origin of this software must not be misrepresented, either
* by explicit claim or by omission.
* 3. Altered versions must be plainly marked as such, and must not
* be misrepresented as being the original software.
**** Alterations to Henry's code are...
**** Copyright (C) 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999,
**** 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
**** by Larry Wall and others
**** You may distribute under the terms of either the GNU General Public
**** License or the Artistic License, as specified in the README file.
You can see the whole file here:
I looked but couldn't find any common name for this license
of Henry's. Is it on our list? Is it free? What name should
I use in the License tag?
rpminspect performs a License tag validation on packages. The license data
comes from a JSON data file that I think was produced at some point from the
Fedora charts on the wiki but then never really updated. Consequently, it
raises failures that are incorrect per current licensing data.
The data for rpminspect comes from:
The license data is in licenses/fedora.json
The format should be somewhat easy to understand. I didn't create it. I
found this database and ran with it. I'd like to come up with a way to keep
it in sync with the data on the wiki. Right now I advise package maintainers
to send me pull requests to update the data, but that's not going to be a long
Anyone have any thoughts on this? Ideas of how to keep the information up to
date in all locations?
David Cantrell <dcantrell(a)redhat.com>
Red Hat, Inc. | Boston, MA | EST5EDT
There was a change of OCCT licence for version 6.7.0. It's LGPL + additional clause. The full text is here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/Open_CASCADE_Technology_Public_L... The additional clause:
Open CASCADE Exception (version 1.0) to GNU LGPL version 2.1.
The object code (i.e. not a source) form of a "work that uses the Library" can incorporate material from a header file that is part of the Library. As a special exception to the GNU Lesser General Public License version 2.1, you may distribute such object code incorporating material from header files provided with the Open CASCADE Technology libraries (including code of CDL generic classes) under terms of your choice, provided that you give prominent notice in supporting documentation to this code that it makes use of or is based on facilities provided by the Open CASCADE Technology software.
Is it a show stopper for fedora?