[Bug 1376845] New: The license tag should mention GPL+ or Artistic

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376845

Bug ID: 1376845
           Summary: The license tag should mention GPL+ or Artistic
           Product: Fedora
           Version: rawhide
         Component: perl-Params-Validate
          Assignee: [e-mail]
          Reporter: [e-mail]
        QA Contact: [e-mail]
                CC: [e-mail], [e-mail],
                    [e-mail]

Params-Validate-1.24/c/ppport.h contains license declaration:

This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
modify it under the same terms as Perl itself.

The file is included into compilation unit when compiling
lib/Params/Validate/XS.c into XS.so. Thus I think the spec file should mention
"GPL+ or Artistic" in the License tag. Now it declares "Artistic 2.0" only.

[Bug 1376845] The license tag should mention GPL+ or Artistic

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376845

Ralf Corsepius  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |CLOSED
         Resolution|---                         |NOTABUG
        Last Closed|                            |2016-09-19 07:43:06

--- Comment #1 from Ralf Corsepius  ---
(In reply to Petr Pisar from comment #0)
> Thus I think the spec file should
> mention "GPL+ or Artistic" in the License tag. Now it declares "Artistic
> 2.0" only.

I do not agree. This perl-dist is clearly licensed Aritistic-2.0 as whole.
The fact contains a "GPL or Artistic" licenced file is irrelevant.

[Bug 1376845] The license tag should mention GPL+ or Artistic

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376845

Petr Pisar  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|CLOSED                      |ASSIGNED
             Blocks|                            |182235 (FE-Legal)
         Resolution|NOTABUG                     |---
           Keywords|                            |Reopened

--- Comment #2 from Petr Pisar  ---
I don't agree with your resolution.

c/ppport.h is "GPL+ or Artistic". Because Fedora does not permit Artistic, the
file is compiled as "GPL+". And if you link GPL+ code into an Artistic 2.0 code
(lib/Params/Validate/XS.c), the result is tainted by GPL. Thus the binary
package must state GPL+ in the license tag.

Raising to the Fedora legal team for a decision.

Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=182235
[Bug 182235] Fedora Legal Tracker

[Bug 1376845] The license tag should mention GPL+ or Artistic

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376845

Tom "spot" Callaway  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |[e-mail]

--- Comment #3 from Tom "spot" Callaway  ---
The header file is an embedded copy of ppport.h, from Devel::PPPort. That file,
like the rest of Devel::PPPort, is under the same license as perl (GPL+ or
Artistic). It is compiled into the binary results that go into the
Params-Validate binary RPM, thus, it _must_ be reflected in the license.

The correct license tag for the Params-Validate package is:

# One file is GPL+ or Artistic: c/ppport.h
License: Artistic 2.0 and (GPL+ or Artistic)

You could, perhaps, ask the copyright holder for Devel::PPPort if they would be
willing to permit use of the bundled c/ppport.h under the terms of the Artistic
2.0 license, but as is right now, they have not given approval for that, and it
would not be correct to use it under those terms.

Please correct the license tag at your earliest convenience.

[Bug 1376845] The license tag should mention GPL+ or Artistic

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376845

Tom "spot" Callaway  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |CLOSED
         Resolution|---                         |RAWHIDE
        Last Closed|2016-09-19 07:43:06         |2018-08-09 10:29:38

--- Comment #4 from Tom "spot" Callaway  ---
Waited two weeks for you to make this change, but as you did not, I went ahead
and did it in rawhide.

Fixed in perl-Params-Validate-1.29-8.fc29.