Re: hfsprogs is not DFSG-Free
Hello!
I have done some research and I do not think that the claim that this
software is not dfsg-free is correct.
First of all, the license claimed in debian/copyright is incorrect. The
upstream package that hfsprogs is based on - diskdev_cmds-332.25 [1] -
is not covered by the APSL-2.0 but versions 1.0, 1.1 and 1.2 [2, 3, 4].
Secondly, the APSL-1.2 [5] does not fail the dissident test in my opinion
as claimed in [6] as the paragraph 2.2 (c), which mandates the public distribution
of modifications to the software package, talks about "Deployed Modifications",
i.e. public distribution:
> (c) You must make Source Code of all Your Deployed Modifications publicly
> available under the terms of this License, including the license grants
> set forth in Section 3 below, for as long as you Deploy the Covered Code
> or twelve (12) months from the date of initial Deployment, whichever
> is longer. You should preferably distribute the Source Code of Your
> Deployed Modifications electronically (e.g. download from a web site); and
What "Deploy" means, is explained in 1.4:
> 1.4 "Deploy" means to use, sublicense or distribute Covered Code other than
> for Your internal research and development (R&D) and/or Personal Use,
> and includes without limitation, any and all internal use or distribution
> of Covered Code within Your business or organization except for R&D use
> and/or Personal Use, as well as direct or indirect sublicensing or distribution
> of Covered Code by You to any third party in any form or manner.
Thus, the license does not fail the dissident test as explained in [7] as the
requirement for public distribution of modifications explicitly excludes personal
use and/or use in research and development.
I do not see how the APSL-1.2 deviates from the GPL-2 here which also requires the
distribution of modifications outside personal use [8]:
> 3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under Section
> 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above
> provided that you also do one of the following:
>
> a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code,
> which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a
> medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
> b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give
> any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing
> source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding
> source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on
> a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
> c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to distribute
> corresponding source code. (This alternative is allowed only for noncommercial
> distribution and only if you received the program in object code or executable
> form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)
The GPL-2 is even stricter as it mandates three years of availability of modifications
in 3. b) while the APSL-1.2 requires only 12 months.
Adrian
> [1] https://opensource.apple.com/source/diskdev_cmds/diskdev_cmds-332.25/
> [2] https://opensource.apple.com/source/diskdev_cmds/diskdev_cmds-332.25/newfs_hfs.tproj/newfs_hfs.c.auto.html
> [3] https://opensource.apple.com/source/diskdev_cmds/diskdev_cmds-332.25/fsck_hfs.tproj/fsck_hfs.c.auto.html
> [4] https://opensource.apple.com/source/diskdev_cmds/diskdev_cmds-332.25/mount_hfs.tproj/mount_hfs.c.auto.html
> [5] https://opensource.apple.com/source/hfs/hfs-522.0.9/APPLE_LICENSE
> [6] https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2001/09/msg00103.html
> [7] https://wiki.debian.org/DissidentTest
> [8] https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.html
--
.''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' : Debian Developer - glaubitz@debian.org
`. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de
`- GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
Reply to: