Re: OpenCascade license opinion
Adam C Powell IV a écrit :
> Greetings,
>
> I just sent in an RFP for Salomé, a very nice and highly capable
> engineering tool under LGPL.
That was my goal when I started to look at packaging OpenCascade. But
there is a lot of work, as Salomé depends on a lot of libraries or
softwares that are not yet in Debian.
> It depends on OpenCascade, which has a license which sounds DFSG-free.
> The license is at: http://www.opencascade.org/occ/license/
>
> There were two discussions on the OpenCascade license last year:d
>
> * http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2006/06/msg00222.html
> concluded: the "In short" preamble description is not free, but
> the license itself is, so an upstream declaration that the
> preamble is not binding would make it DFSG-free.
> * http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2006/03/msg00286.html
> concluded that the WildMagic license is non-free, but did not
> conclude anything about OpenCascade.
>
> Aurelien, did you contact upstream and receive any reply on the preamble
> status? I don't see anything in WNPP, nor in unstable, nor in incoming.
Yes I have contacted upstream about the preamble. They answered me
vaguely about the whole license, saying that it is clear that any
changes have to be sent back.
Please also note that in the sources, the copyright header of triangle.c
looks problematic. It is clearly non-DFSG free, and Open CASCADE doesn't
seems to have any copyright on this file. They never answered me about
that point.
--
.''`. Aurelien Jarno | GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73
: :' : Debian developer | Electrical Engineer
`. `' aurel32@debian.org | aurelien@aurel32.net
`- people.debian.org/~aurel32 | www.aurel32.net
Reply to: