From: Luca Ceresoli <luca@lucaceresoli.net>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 2/4] zeromq: add license information
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 16:48:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50379455.8090907@lucaceresoli.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHt8ZCN0P9_xEWzKhWcKLy=WixYoE8ZtVS0WYkmxT_Cu8ufrow@mail.gmail.com>
Simon Dawson wrote:
> On 21 August 2012 11:42, Thomas Petazzoni
> <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> wrote:
>> Le Sun, 19 Aug 2012 21:08:42 +0100,
>> spdawson at gmail.com a ?crit :
>>
>>> +ZEROMQ_LICENSE = GPLv3+
>>> +ZEROMQ_LICENSE_FILES = COPYING
>>
>> No. Most of ZeroMQ is apparently under the LGPLv3+, but the
>> COPYING.LESSER contains a special exception. This needs to be encoded
>> differently.
>
> Okay; thanks Thomas. It's not clear to me how properly to express that
> using the package license variables; I'll wait to see if there are any
> suggestions.
ZeroMQ COPYING.LESSER defines the project license in a quite complex way:
a GPLv3+ with exceptions, plus some parts licensed under the MIT (X11)
license:
> Parts of the software are licensed under the MIT (X11) license as
follows:
>
> Copyright (c) 2007-2010 Contributors as listed in AUTHORS
>
> Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person
> obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation
...
(From COPYING.LESSER, bottom part)
However, their Wiki has a clarifying page:
http://www.zeromq.org/blog:rfc-0mq-contributions
Briefly:
- ZeroMQ used to be "open source" (license not reported) with comtributor
agreement;
- then they started accepting contributions under the MIT/X11 license;
- in august 2010 they chose to switch to LGPLv3+, and converted all file
headers accordingly.
So, it looks like the license is an "LGPLv3+ with exceptions", and the
"Parts under the MIT/X11" do not exist anymore. But I'm not sure my
understanding is correct.
It may be worth asking if the MIT/X11 part of COPYING.LESSER can be
considerednot applicable anymore, and so if it can be dropped to simplify
their license.
Of course searching their mail archives for more such info, or other
clarification, is the best thing. The period around august 2010 may be
interesting.
Simon, would you mind doing this research?
Luca
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-24 14:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-08-19 20:08 [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/4] yajl: add license information spdawson at gmail.com
2012-08-19 20:08 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH 2/4] zeromq: " spdawson at gmail.com
2012-08-21 10:42 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2012-08-21 11:38 ` Simon Dawson
2012-08-24 14:48 ` Luca Ceresoli [this message]
2012-08-28 8:27 ` Simon Dawson
2012-08-28 11:52 ` Simon Dawson
2012-08-19 20:08 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH 3/4] zlib: " spdawson at gmail.com
2012-08-21 10:42 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2012-08-19 20:08 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH 4/4] zxing: " spdawson at gmail.com
2012-08-21 10:42 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2012-08-21 10:41 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/4] yajl: " Thomas Petazzoni
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=50379455.8090907@lucaceresoli.net \
--to=luca@lucaceresoli.net \
--cc=buildroot@busybox.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox