On 13/08/2022 18:30, Lee wrote:
I just noticed that the netperf package is in the [non-free] repository
https://packages.debian.org/bullseye/netperf
which seems wrong.
Is the MIT license really not compatible with open source or is the
netperf package using outdated licensing info or .. what?
Very interesting. I don't know about this specific package, but MIT in
general is allowed in DSFG.
For example, this package is full MIT and its in Debian:
https://packages.debian.org/sid/kraptor
netperf license, as seen on
https://metadata.ftp-master.debian.org/changelogs//non-free/n/netperf/netperf_2.7.0-0.1_copyright,
still reads:
Copyright (C) 1993 Hewlett-Packard Company
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
It must have been recently this package changed from Copyright (C) 1993
Hewlett-Packard Company to MIT license, and Debian didn't catched up to
this fact yet?
Also their github README states:
"This version of netperf has been opensourced by Hewlett Packard
Enterprise using the MIT license."
And also
"Licenses updated."
Maybe older versions indeed were not under MIT.
EDIT: Ok I think I found it.
https://github.com/HewlettPackard/netperf/commit/2d88bcc75d97f462eafe8605f8da0c1f875b7dad
It seems that this package license has changed from full HP copyright to
MIT, on 20 January 2021.
Perhaps package needs updating in Debian repository :)
The debian package copyright file link points to
https://metadata.ftp-master.debian.org/changelogs//non-free/n/netperf/netperf_2.7.0-0.1_copyright
which has
Upstream Authors:
Copyright 1993-2007 Hewlett-Packard Company
but the homepage link points to
https://github.com/HewlettPackard/netperf
which has a COPYING file pointing to
https://github.com/HewlettPackard/netperf/blob/master/COPYING
which has
HewlettPackard/netperf is licensed under the
MIT License
# Copyright 2021 Hewlett Packard Enterprise Development LP
Thanks
Lee
--
With kindest regards, Piotr.
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian - The universal operating system
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://www.debian.org/
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀
