Re: Removal of copyright years

On 2025-02-06 13:12, Peter Wienemann wrote: As part of this change copyright years were removed from the copyright notice (see [0]). According to [1] this happened because the upstream authors "got tired of updating those years and it matches the LF recommendation" (where "LF recommendation" is

Re: Developer's Certificate of Origin

On 2024-11-26 14:31, Simon Josefsson wrote: I don't see any problem with the license on the GPL text itself, when GPL is used as a license on a piece of work in Debian and documented in debian/copyright. The DCO is not used in that way, and nobody has suggested they ought to be treated the sam

Re: Updating the PHP license

On 2024-05-19 14:53, Ben Ramsey wrote: One of my goals with the RFC is to get rid of the idea of a “PHP License,” so it deprecates the PHP License and *replaces* it with the BSD 3-Clause License. I don’t want there to be a “PHP License, version 4.0.” I think that will continue to cause confusi

Re: Missing copyright clause of debian directory

I've only looked at this situation for a total of five minutes prior to writing this email, so take this with a grain of salt. But to help you make forward progress... Upstream seems to use GPL-3+ (not GPL-3). For example: https://github.com/fxbois/web-mode/blob/a9d21841224da3295f2dd0a90022f5e4

Re: "freenginx" open source package and "nginx" from F5 open source, potential conflict?

First off, I don't know anyone involved in this. On 2024-02-26 11:49, Thomas Ward wrote: Back on February 14^th , an email went to the standard NGINX mailing list that NGINX (F5) open source development changed a lot of policies and interfered with security policy use cases I don't know what

Re: FreeSWITCH license analysis

I dug into this a bit. We use FreeSWITCH at my day job, so I'm certainly interested in this sort of thing. I'm not a lawyer either, though. In this particular case, I see @coppice-git's point that these are basically math data tables. Personally, I don't think it's a problem in this particular

Re: d/copyright entries for licenses and copyright data

I document them the same, except that I also add use the DEP-5 "Comment" field to indicate that it came from "B". -- Richard OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

BSD-3-Clause-Attribution GPL Compatibility

The BSD-3-Clause-Attribution license [1] has a term which reads: Redistributions of any form whatsoever must retain the following acknowledgment: 'This product includes software developed by .' where examples of are: the "Universidad de Palermo, Argentina" (http://www.palermo.ed

Re: mini-httpd NCSA license

On 2023-07-02 16:43, Alexandru Mihail wrote: mini-httpd contains early portions of code commited by Rob McCool which seem to originate from NCSA httpd. Just htpasswd.c (which is what I get when searching for Rob McCool), or something else? How do we proceed to clarify this situation? Figu

Re: Zend Optimizer License

On Thu, 2008-07-10 at 22:36 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: > Le jeudi 10 juillet 2008 à 15:06 -0500, Richard Laager a écrit : > > 7. Indemnity. Licensee will, at its own expense, defend any action > > brought by a third party against Zend to the extent that such action is >

Zend Optimizer License

I'm looking to package the Zend Optimizer software for Debian. It's definitely non-free, but I believe the license allows for redistribution. I'm looking for a sanity check on that point before I go any further and would be grateful for any comments you can provide. Thanks, Richard LICENSE T