Hi,
I've submitted a review request (#461484) and have a couple of licensing issues there (quoting from BZ):
- from the licensing point of view, we have a small mess
a) lots of files have headers defining them as GPLv2+ (good) b) headers of some other files specifu Public Domain as license (good again) c) however there are several files ( for instance clients/threadtest.c and many files under /lib ) which have no license specified. What reason can we invoke in order to assume that they are like all the others, Public Domain or GPLv2+ ? In addition to that, the sourcefarge page of the project (http://sourceforge.net/projects/twin/) claims that the project is licensed as GPL and LGPL, but LGPL is only mentioned in the source through the presence of the standard LGPL license file; I have not been able to locate any other trace of it. Public Domain + GPLv2+ =
no > problem, but the presence of files with no specific license make me
ask for help. Anyone more experienced in licensing willing to shed some light ?
1) do I have to ask upstream to specify license in each file?
2) what license should this package be or do I have to ask upstream to clarify it?
Thanks for any help, Milos Jakubicek
On Fri, 2008-10-31 at 15:29 +0100, Milos Jakubicek wrote:
- do I have to ask upstream to specify license in each
file?
You really should, yes.
- what license should this package be or do I have to ask upstream to
clarify it?
Given that upstream seems to think some files are under LGPL, but no files actually claim to be, it is worth asking them to clarify the situation.
~spot
-
Milos Jakubicek -
Tom Callaway