Re: Trilinos licensing
> Both of those licenses sound great and compatable. Provided it's not
> BSD-4.
It's 3-clause, so we're good.
> https://www.debian.org/social_contract
>
> contains the DFSG, our guidelines for free software works that are fit
> for Debian's main archive section.
I checked all licenses on <http://trilinos.org/?page_id=143> and
besides the BSD-3 clause and the LGPL 2.1, they appear to be either
one of
* MIT
* BSD 2-clause
* Apache 2.0
* GPL3 with Bison exception
* "Public domain" (not a license)
with copyright from various institutions. Can you say anything about
their interoperability and Debian compatibility of those licenses?
Cheers,
Nico
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 5:44 PM, Paul Tagliamonte <paultag@debian.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 05:38:47PM +0100, Nico Schlömer wrote:
>> Unfortunately, Trilinos' licensing is not exactly straightforward.
>
> Alas; this happens.
>
>> Most of it is BSD-licensed, part of if LGPL, with some contributions
>> of other licenses mixed in;
>
> Both of those licenses sound great and compatable. Provided it's not
> BSD-4.
>
>> more details on
>> <http://trilinos.org/?page_id=143>. I've contacted Trilinos about what
>> parts of Trilinos are concerned by those other licenses.
>>
>> What's you guys' opinion here, specifically when it comes to
>> compatibility with Debian? (I could disable certain subpackages if the
>> licensing does not concur with Debian's policies.)
>
> https://www.debian.org/social_contract
>
> contains the DFSG, our guidelines for free software works that are fit
> for Debian's main archive section.
>
> Licenses must be compatable with each other or the resulting work isn't
> distributable.
>
>> Cheers,
>> Nico
>
> Cheers,
> Paul
>
> --
> .''`. Paul Tagliamonte <paultag@debian.org> | Proud Debian Developer
> : :' : 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352 D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87
> `. `'` http://people.debian.org/~paultag
> `- http://people.debian.org/~paultag/conduct-statement.txt
Reply to: