On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 09:02:52AM -0700, Bruce Rogers wrote: > When trying to submit a spice package to openSUSE, > our licensing team noticed that the file server/red_parse_qxl.h > is GPL-2.0+. This seems like an oversight, particularly as the > corresponding red_parse_qxl.c file right next to the header file > has a LGPL-2.1+ license, which was corrected subsequent to its > initial submission (see commit id: > 11034dda428865e442dd2c981851500ed96b9a0c) > > Could someone confirm if this is a mistake or not.
Both red_parse_qxl.h & red_parse_qxl.c were introduced in commit 11034dda428865e442dd2c981851500ed96b9a0c by Gerd with GPLv2+. In commit c29e4f9dd852231f04877ea700f0c3686f4500f3 Hans fixed red_parse_qxl.c to have the LGPLv2+ header, but didn't touch the .h file. It is pretty clear to me that the .h file should have been fixed at the same time to have the LGPLv2+ header. In addition simple header file declarations like those in red_parse_qxl.h can't really be considered to be copyrightable content, so while IANAL, the license header in the .h is not really having any significant legal influence IMHO. Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| _______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
