[Bug 581279] Review Request: erlang-ibrowse - Erlang HTTP client

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=581279

--- Comment #6 from David Cantrell <dcantrell at redhat.com> 2010-05-30 19:56:09 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > - MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
> > license.
> > 
> > The License field indicates 'BSD or LGPLv2' but it should be 'BSD and LGPLv2'.
> 
> I'm afraid that you're wrong here.
> 
> "ibrowse is available under two different licenses. LGPL and the BSD license."
> 
> This sounds for me like ibrowse can be used either under LGPLv2+ (2+ is
> explicitly stated in the attached license) or under BSD.

That's not how I read the line in the README file.  In fact, I believe the line
is too ambiguous.  The first sentence indicates the software is available under
two licenses.  The second sentence uses "and" to join the two licenses, and
given that the first sentence doesn't clearly state that it is your choice of
license, one can only safely conclude that the software is under both licenses.

The source code does not make use of license boilerplate text, it's not easy to
tell if the author meant that it is your choice of license or if some of the
software is under the BSD license or some of it is under the LGPL license. 
However, if that was the case, the entire collection would constitute a derived
work and only the LGPL would apply.

Can you get clarification from the author on this?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.