[dev] License confusion again Re: [commits] Horde branch master updated. e18902266fd2643ba6131fd800d0aa6fb922298c

[Ralf Lang]

Am Mittwoch, 15. Juni 2011, 18:49:44 schrieb Jan Schneider:
> Zitat von Ralf Lang <lang at b1-systems.de>:
> > Am Mittwoch, 15. Juni 2011, 18:26:56 schrieb Ralf Lang:
> >> Am Mittwoch, 15. Juni 2011, 18:21:08 schrieb Jan Schneider:
> >> > Zitat von Ralf Lang <lang at b1-systems.de>:
> >> > > The branch "master" has been updated.
> >> > > The following is a summary of the commits.
> >> > > 
> >> > > from: f9e41422dbf5ecf910292181bb728ccb80e8ad84
> >> > > 
> >> > > e189022 replaced outdated versions of GPL and LGPL which had the
> >> > > wrong FSF address included. As per recent discussion on the list, I
> >> > > updated to newer license revisions if the pear xml pointed to the
> >> > > text of a newer revision than the shipped file
> >> > 
> >> > We did *not* discuss to change the licenses' versions. If the link in
> >> > package.xml points to a wrong version, those need to be fixed. We did
> >> > *not* update to GPL/LGPL 3.
> >> 
> >> OK please revert.
> >> I'll update the links and use an updated version of the GPL/LPGL2 files
> >> with the right address.
> > 
> > BTW to add to the confusion:
> > 
> > In some cases (library) we do not ship the file anymore but only
> > have the pear
> > xml statements "GPL" or "LGPL" and the links either in there or in the
> > source code which usually point to the most recent license versions.
> > 
> > Take for example Horde_Exception.
> > 
> > No license file shipped.
> > 
> > The XML says LGPL and points to http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/lesser.html
> > which is version 3.
> > 
> > Exception.php also links there and points to a file COPYING (not included
> > though)
> > 
> > Now in this case, is it LGPL v3 or v2?
> 
> Everything should be v2 unless explicitly specified as v3 (which we
> don't have anywhere I think).
> 
> Jan.

Thank you for clarifying. 

If we can be sure there is no v3 piece one could probably sed the repo for a 
cleanup of all those links (there's plenty of them and manual work would be 
very time consuming).

Should the pear xml tags also be updated?

In distribution I use tokens from this table:
http://spdx.org/licenses/

but I don't know if this is also practice in pear.

I won't touch that part again though before all bits are clear.
Don't want to mess up ;-)


-- 
Ralf Lang
Linux Consultant / Developer

B1 Systems GmbH
Osterfeldstraße 7 / 85088 Vohburg / http://www.b1-systems.de
GF: Ralph Dehner / Unternehmenssitz: Vohburg / AG: Ingolstadt,HRB 3537