Hi, pngquant was relicense under GPLv3 [1] but after a short time author added an exception and make pngquant as dual-licensed the latest README.md says:
License
pngquant is dual-licensed:
GPL v3 or later, and additional copyright notice must be kept for older parts of the code. See COPYRIGHT for details.
For commercial/closed-source/AppStore distribution please ask kornel@pngquant.org for a license.
This is acceptable for include in Fedora ?
Thanks,
[1] https://github.com/pornel/pngquant/commits/master/README.md
On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 07:56:37PM +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote:
Hi, pngquant was relicense under GPLv3 [1] but after a short time author added an exception and make pngquant as dual-licensed the latest README.md says:
License
pngquant is dual-licensed:
GPL v3 or later, and additional copyright notice must be kept for older parts of the code. See COPYRIGHT for details.
For commercial/closed-source/AppStore distribution please ask kornel@pngquant.org for a license.
This is acceptable for include in Fedora ?
The 'please ask' sentence could be read as implying that the authors regard commercial and 'AppStore' distribution as not being allowed by the nominal GPLv3 license. In the past I believe we've treated that sort of thing as reason enough not to allow inclusion in Fedora. You could try getting the upstream project to revise the sentence.
Richard
On Dom, 2016-04-17 at 08:08 -0400, Richard Fontana wrote:
On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 07:56:37PM +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote:
Hi, pngquant was relicense under GPLv3 [1] but after a short time author added an exception and make pngquant as dual-licensed the latest README.md says:
License
pngquant is dual-licensed:
GPL v3 or later, and additional copyright notice must be kept for older parts of the code. See COPYRIGHT for details.
For commercial/closed-source/AppStore distribution please ask k ornel@pngquant.org for a license.
This is acceptable for include in Fedora ?
The 'please ask' sentence could be read as implying that the authors regard commercial and 'AppStore' distribution as not being allowed by the nominal GPLv3 license. In the past I believe we've treated that sort of thing as reason enough not to allow inclusion in Fedora. You could try getting the upstream project to revise the sentence.
The author reply: "Sure, I can clarify. It wasn't my intention to add exceptions to GPL. As far as I understand App Store EULA is incompatible with GPL, so I wanted to highlight that. How about:
For Free/Libre Open Source Software it's available under [GPL v3 or later]
For use in non-GPL software (e.g. closed-source software or App Store distribution) please ask for a commercial license. "
Looks good ?
You may write directly to author here: https://github.com/pornel/pngquant/commit/93aa1116943aba0734f981fe54cf8 d6650f28981#commitcomment-17135436
Thanks,
On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 09:41:44PM +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote:
The author reply: "Sure, I can clarify. It wasn't my intention to add exceptions to GPL. As far as I understand App Store EULA is incompatible with GPL, so I wanted to highlight that. How about:
For Free/Libre Open Source Software it's available under [GPL v3 or later]
For use in non-GPL software (e.g. closed-source software or App Store distribution) please ask for a commercial license. "
Looks good ?
Yes, I consider the author's response satisfactory.
Richard
-
Richard Fontana -
Sérgio Basto