no explicit license on upstream
Hello,
I'm packaging iSpy [1]. ITP [2] gives a brief description.
Upstream tarball is here [3].
Unpacking it, ispy application is under ispy directory.
Under the remaining directories, you can find a bunch of dependencies
which are already in Debian.
Good.
My question is about licenses: dependencies have been licensed well
otherwise they would not be in Debian but ispy directory and ispy
website resources don't explicitly refer to a specific license.
Should upstream create a LICENSE file? Or a manifest/disclaimer on
download page would be better? Or 1 and 2?
Below some iSpy developers thoughts. (I CCed them, please CC them)
[...]
>> The bits that cannot be considered a derivative product of any GPL
>> software I guess are BSD licensed, given that all the contributors
>> are contractors of the US DoE and **I think** that's the policy there.
>> This is a rough guess and no one really ever looked into it.
>
> Work of U.S. federal government employees is in public domain says
> http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLUSGov. We are
> technically contractors and my understanding is that particular rule
> doesn't apply as such. Off the top of my head I don't recall whether
> some other agreement exists at project level (e.g. US-CMS).
[...]
Cheers,
Gabriele
[1] http://iguana.web.cern.ch/iguana/ispy/index.htm
[2] http://bugs.debian.org/559412
[3] http://iguana.web.cern.ch/iguana/ispy/ispy-sdk.tgz
Reply to: