[Help-gnutls] Re: Using LGPLv3+ license for libgnutls?

[Daniel Kahn Gillmor]

On Tue 2008-09-09 12:01:23 -0400, Simon Josefsson wrote:

> I tried to do some systematic searches, but the debian copyright
> information tends to be incorrect (not mentioning versions) or difficult
> to parse.

This is sadly true.  Automatic resolution of this sort of question
would be much easier if the machine-readable debian/copyright proposal
was more widely-adopted:

 http://wiki.debian.org/Proposals/CopyrightFormat

> I recognize cups, snort and ekg, and they are fairly well known.

fwiw, gobby seems to be GPL-2+, not GPL-2, at least according to the
debian copyright info, so it's possilbe that the fedora tags are wrong
on that package:

[0 address@hidden ~]$ grep -A5 ^License: /usr/share/doc/libobby-0.4-1/copyright 
License:

  This library is written by the 0x539 dev group and is licensed
  under the GNU General Public License (GPL) version 2 or any
  later version. A copy of the license is included in the
  distribution.
[0 address@hidden ~]$ 

And cups appears to be ambiguous as far as the GPL'ed bits (though the
LGPL'ed bits are pretty clearly V2-only):

[0 address@hidden ~]$ grep -A6 ^INTRODUCTION 
/usr/share/doc/cups-common/copyright 
INTRODUCTION

The Common UNIX Printing System(tm), ("CUPS(tm)"), is provided
under the GNU General Public License ("GPL") and GNU Library
General Public License ("LGPL"), Version 2, with exceptions for
Apple operating systems and the OpenSSL toolkit. A copy of the
exceptions and licenses follow this introduction.
[0 address@hidden ~]$ 

I couldn't come up with an automated way to pull the answers to these
questions out of debian automatically either :(

   --dkg

pgpxBuTSSZvz8.pgp
Description: PGP signature