Bug#714058: cc65 packaging
On 05/05/2015 08:42 PM, Spiro Trikaliotis wrote:
> Please note that Uz insisted on any contribution to cc65 to be licensed
> under zlib license. Thus, the only parts and contributions that might
> not fall under zlib are the parts that were there when Uz took over the
> project.
>
> Thus, it does not make any sense to contact any contributor to cc65 in
> the time frame when Uz was the head of the project, because there, we
> can be sure that any contribution actually *IS* zlib.
>
> Have a look at "Patch Acceptance Policy" on
> http://www.cc65.org/oldindex.php#Contribs
Well, together with the statement I posted from Ullrich above plus John
R Dunning's consent to license any parts that he wrote under the Zlib as
well, I think we can say with 100% confidence now that it is justified
to change the license for the whole source code to Zlib :).
Good on Ullrich that he already made sure right from the beginning that
all further contributions had to be done under the Zlib license and it's
always just been the parts written by John R Dunning that were
problematic but that is settled now.
@Oliver: Do you agree that we are 100% safe on the license now? Or is
there anything that you would still like to see answered?
If you agree, please cut down the LICENSE [1] file to the lines 42
through 58. Feel free to re-add the CREDITS file if you like but given
the above link Spiro provided we don't even need the CREDITS file to be
safe regarding the license. However, it's always a good practice to
include the file and putting it right into the root directory of the
source tree.
@Spiro: Thanks for the link above, that definitely settles it now
without any question and makes any speculation unnecessary :).
Adrian
> [1] https://github.com/cc65/cc65/blob/master/LICENSE
--
.''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' : Debian Developer - glaubitz@debian.org
`. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de
`- GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
Reply to: