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

Re: is igmpproxy dfsg compliant?

On Thursday 24 November 2016 19:29:21 Roberto wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 06:36:53PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > I'm not saying that it invalidates. Just that I understood that
> > whole igmpproxy can be redistributed under GPLv2+ and some other
> > parts, based on mrouted had original license Stanford.txt... and
> > those and only those parts (without other GPL) can be
> > redistributed also under Stanford license... This is how I
> > understood it.
> OK, I think I understand it better now. We are basically saying the
> same thing then, with only one difference.
> If the original code of mrouted was included bundled in a separate
> directory unmodified, or easily replaceable, then yes, you could
> replace it with the new BSD version and then "relicense" all
> Stanford code under BSD.
> But, as far as I know, it has been modified and mixed into other
> product, so in order to change the license of those parts, permission
> is needed from all of its authors and contributors (which now
> includes igmpproxy authors because the modifications are also
> copyrighted by them). That's why in my first email I say that nobody
> else can switch the license, even if mrouted switched long ago, the
> forked code is a different program now. Sorry if it was not clear.

So problem is that all contributors to igmpproxy contributed their code 
under mix of GPLv2 and Stanford license?

> > So... question now is, can be whole igmpproxy (as one software
> > package) redistributed under GPLv2+? I think yes that yes.
> I disagree, I'm not even sure that the Standford license is
> compatible with the GPL, and even when all licenses are compatible,
> you should still include all of them in debian/copyright file and
> should pass the DFSG.


> That is only my opinion, I would like to read opinions from more
> people on this list.
> > Or... if you think that not, what is reason, and what needs to be
> > done?
> > 
> > And can be included igmpproxy package into Debian?
> Probably asking the authors if they can please switch the license, it
> will benefit not only Debian but anyone who downloads from upstream
> source as well.

What do you mean with "switch the license"? From which and to which 

Pali Rohár

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply to: