On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 14-12-15 09:19, Rashad Kanavath wrote: > > There are issue with embedded sources inside ossim > > > > GeoTrans > > shapelib > > matrix lib > > > > But in the debian/copyright file, I found notes explaining these stuff. > > > http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/ossim.git/tree/debian/copyright#n171 > > What are the issues with these embedded sources? > > shapelib is packaged, but the others are not. As long as their licensing > is not problematic, they don't have to be excluded from a repacked > upstream tarball. > Okay. This was a mistake on my side of being not clear. I was saying embedded sources are not a good idea. I consider this an "issue". I have asked them to allow use external geotrans instead of embedded sources. https://packages.debian.org/sid/utils/geotranz > > On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 7:22 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: > >> I've looked at OSSIM 1.8.20-1 again, and the licensing is a mess. The > >> website claims that the code is under the LGPL-3, but most files > >> reference the top-level LICENSE.txt which contains the MIT/Expat license > >> terms. Some files claim the license is LGPL and reference the top-level > >> LICENSE.txt which is the aforementioned MIT/Expat license. > >> > > > > The current license is MIT for ossim-core. This is given incorrectly in > the > > website. > > Obviously. The relicensing from LGPL to MIT is incomplete. The fact that > the website is wrong is of secondary concern, the big problem is the > contradictory license headers, see for example: > > ossim/src/ossim/base/ossimObject.cpp > > It specifies licensing like this: > > License: LGPL > > See LICENSE.txt file in the top level directory for more details. > > The LICENSE.txt file in the top level directory contains the terms of > the MIT license, not LGPL. This needs to be fixed upstream before we can > update OSSIM in Debian. > > OSSIM 1.8.16 as currently in Debian is licensed differently from later > versions. Its LICENSE.txt file places OSSIM engine under the LGPL and > documents the differently licensed files. This matches the license > headers in the files. > > The currently state of later versions give the impression that the OSSIM > developers don't care enough about licensing to have their source files > reflect the chosen license correctly. > Sadly true. I will ask them for a correction. > > > Note that there are some part of the code which are still under LPGL-2. > > ossim-plugins for instance. There are mostly thirdparty code contributed > by > > OTB and others for reading specific format such as hdf, raw, kakadu etc.. > > That never will come under ossim-core. > > Did all the copyright holders of files in ossim-core agree to relicense > their contributions under the terms of the MIT license? > > I'm currently not concerned about other ossim files than those under the > ossim/ subdirectory in the ossim release tarballs. That's the code we > have packaged in Debian currently. And that is already problematic, we > don't even have to worry about the possible mess in the other > subdirectories. > > Kind Regards, > > Bas > > -- > GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1 > Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146 50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1 > > -- Regards, Rashad
