Perl module licenses (was Re: libxml-filter-sax1tosax2-perl_0.03-1_i386.changes REJECTED)
Well, it seems to be the pedantic season here. I got the following reply
from James Troup when trying to get libxml-filter-sax1tosax2-perl in Debian.
He has some points, but I've got a feeling that a lot more Perl modules in
Debian has the same issue. It's a common practice for modules to have
This is free software, you may use and distribute this module under
the same terms as Perl itself.
and sofar this has not been a problem.
What to do? Do we got back to all our upstream authors and ask them to
clarify their license? Or...
James Troup (email@example.com) wrote:
> Sorry to be pedantic but the only external files you're meant to
> reference in the copyright file are the common licenses in base-files.
> And saying it's "under the same license as Perl itself" is unhelpful;
> which version of Perl? What if Perl changes licenses? etc. I realise
> this may be an upstream thing; if so please ask them to clarify it to
> specify GPL/Artistic explicitly so you can do the same in the
> copyright file.
Ardo van Rangelrooij
home email: firstname.lastname@example.org
home page: http://people.debian.org/~ardo
GnuPG fp: 3B 1F 21 72 00 5C 3A 73 7F 72 DF D9 90 78 47 F9