--- Begin Message ---
<URL: http://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=20179 >
On Wed Jun 28 23:49:46 2006, CRAKRJACK wrote:
> If "perl ppport.h --strip" it ran, all licensing information is removed
> from ppport.h.
Thanks for catching that!
> This means that if somebody releases a package that does
> not fall under the perl license with a stripped ppport.h file, it
> appears that the perl license does not apply.
>
> This raises an interesting question: Should people who use ppport.h be
> encumbered by the perl license? I would like to think not, but it is
> really up to you people, the authors.
>
> This causes problems for people deciding to bundle software (eg; os
> vendors) that use perl-XS packages. Please see:
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2006/06/msg00561.html and
> clairify your position. One of the following two solutions would be ideal:
>
> 1) Make the product of Devel::PPPort (ppport.h) pretty much public
> domain with no licensing requirements whatsoever. This is what autoconf
> et al do.
I don't think this can be done, as ppport.h contains verbatim
copies of functions from the perl core.
> 2) Make it so that "perl ppport.h --strip" does not remove the license
> info, so that people are not mistaken in thinking the perl license does
> not apply.
That's what I've just implemented in my development version of
Devel::PPPort. The change will be part of the next release,
which I'll try to put out next week. I'll let you know when
it's released.
Thanks again for your report!
Regards,
Marcus
--- End Message ---