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

Re: Java library license problem


On Thursday 04 November 2010 at 12:15:41, Julien Viard de Galbert wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 04, 2010 at 12:11:10PM +0100, Mònica wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> Hello,
> > I am trying to package bluej [1], a Java program, but I think there is a license problem. 
> First have you seen the bug was merged with an other ITP [2] where more
> discussion are in progress.

Oh! I didn't see it! I looked for an ITP in [1], but bluej isn't there. 
Instead, there is a RFP in [2].

Do these lists work?

I will offer the little work I've done to this thread :-)

> > This program uses a library that is not free (AppleJavaExtensions.jar). Apparently, the use of this library is only to build the MacOS version of the program. I think I could change the upstream source and achieve that the software won't be dependent on this library (now it is). But I don't know if it's worth to do it...
> > 
> > Otherwise, the upstream source (orig.tar.gz) would include all this non-free software.
> > 
> > Could this package be in main archive area or will it be considered as a non-free software, although I make this changes? If it is considered as non-free software, I'm not interested in packaging it...
> > 
> > What do you do in this cases? What do you recommend?
> I think if you rebuilt a dfsg clean archive to replace the original
> archive and use it for your packaging then it's suitable for main
> (provided there are no other licence issue of course)
> > 
> > [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=585696
> 2: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=587553
> I'm not DD so you might want to wait for other suggestion, anyway
> I hope this helps.

It's good to know it's possible to do :-)

[1] http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/being_packaged
[2] http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/requested

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

Reply to: