[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: License audit on dpkg source tree

Hi. Yes, I'm fine re-licensing my contribution with the same licenses as the rest of the codebase. 


------- Original Message -------
On Monday, March 6th, 2023 at 19:43, Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org> wrote:

> Hi!
> [ Bringing back this old thread, as there is still one unsolved item
> from the old list, and realized afterwards that there were more
> authors involved, not mentioned on the original thread, which I'd
> like to have their answer on record to decide how to proceed in
> the future. ]
> On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 18:11:16 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > This is something that has been bothering me for a long time, so the
> > other day I sat down and did a full license audit of the sources.
> > 
> > I've cleaned up the license headers and added missing ones, as a side
> > effect “licensecheck -r dpkg” works better now. There's still lots of
> > copyright statements missing, I have a patch around to add few, but
> > every file takes time digging, and there's probably more urgent things
> > to tend to. I'd like to get all GPL code unified as GPL-2+,
> > eventually, though.
> > 
> > The remaining issues, which might need asking people around are:
> > * dselect/methods/Debian/Dselect/Ftp.pm: No header
> > dselect/methods/ftp/*: GPL (no version)
> > 
> > The dselect-ftp method from the dpkg-ftp package, states on its
> > debian/copyright file to be under the GPL-2 only. Ideally this
> > would have the same terms as the rest of the code base, in case
> > code needs to be reused for example.
> As I dug up in the old dpkg-ftp history (which I imported into
> https://git.dpkg.org/cgit/dpkg/dpkg-ftp.git/ for analysis), there
> were also Yann Dirson and Christian Hudon (both CCed). Would both of
> you be fine with relicensing your changes there from GPL-2 to GPL-2+?
> The last author for whom I have no contact details is Andy W.P. Guy,
> but I'll try asking around.
> Thanks,
> Guillem

Reply to: