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

Declaring license for autogenerated file (W3C)



Hello,

as part of packaging "pylatexenc" [1], I'm unsure on how to properly declare the license attribution of one of the files in the upstream package.

Upstream mentions that the file ("pylatexenc/latexencode/_uni2latexmap_xml.py" [2]) is:
# Automatically generated from unicode.xml by gen_xml_dic.py

although the "unicode.xml" file itself it is not included in the release tarball. It is present in their repository, along with its license [3] (and highlighted in the README, which seems to be W3C.

My initial attempt to convey this information in d/copyright [4] tries to reflect: 1. the "_uni2latexmap_xml.py" is a derivative of the "unicode.xml", and as a result is covered by the same W3C license. 2. the "_uni2latexmap_xml.py" is also covered by the MIT license, as the rest of the files in the package. 3. the "unicode.xml.LICENSE" needs to be copied verbatim in d/copyright in order to cover all the details.

However, I'm not familiar with the W3C license (nor with d/copyright finer points). Would it be possible to have advise on whether the assumptions and the current d/copyright is suitable - and help on correcting otherwise?

Best regards,

[1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=950664
[2] https://github.com/phfaist/pylatexenc/blob/v2.10/pylatexenc/latexencode/_uni2latexmap_xml.py [3] https://github.com/phfaist/pylatexenc/blob/v2.10/tools/unicode.xml.LICENSE [4] https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/python-pylatexenc/-/blob/105ecb9bb8f96b8d253bf8244fd17617af6ea9d2/debian/copyright#L14
--
Diego M. Rodriguez


Reply to: