On Fri, 2012-06-22 at 15:29 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > On 12-06-22 at 03:12pm, Dominique Dumont wrote: > > On Friday 22 June 2012 12:19:07 gregor herrmann wrote: > > > There's only one thing that makes me a bit uneasy: The license terms > > > of t/nameprep*. At a first quick reading I'm not convinced this is > > > DFSG-free (is modification allowed?). > > > Maybe someone else could take a look at this, too. > > > > The copyright is copied from > > > > http://www.gnu.org/software/libidn/draft-josefsson-idn-test-vectors.html > > > > The restrictive clause is "However, this document itself may not be > > modified in any way, such as by removing the copyright notice or > > references to the Internet Society or other Internet organizations, > > except as needed for the purpose of developing Internet standards in > > which case the procedures for copyrights defined in the Internet > > Standards process must be followed, or as required to translate it > > into languages other than English." > > > > I think this clause apply only to the above link. > > > > IMO, the test vectors in the Perl module tests are a derivative work > > of this document and are covered with "derivative works that comment > > on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be > > prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in part, > > without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright > > notice and this paragraph are included on all such copies and > > derivative works." > > > > So I think this derivative work is DFSG even if the above link is not. > > Since (I suspect) tests are not crucial, I would prefer to avoid them > due to the ambiguity of interpretation. > > The quoted legalese reminds me of RFC documents which I have been > instructed in the past to strip from source to make it DFSG-compliant. It seems that a derivative is already distributed with Debian, in the python source (Lib/test/test_codecs.py). It's much the same as t/nameprep.t, mostly copied and modified from the RFC's appendix A. So, I agree with dod on this one. If it's still a concern I could always email the RFC author. He's upstream for some GNU projects, so I don't think he'd intend such restrictions. The python package does not have anything special mentioned in d/copyright, so I'm not sure what I should put, if anything. Ioan
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part