On Tue, May 16, 2006 at 04:12:31PM +0900, akira yamada wrote: > Aurélien GÉRÔME wrote: > >>> Package: libopenssl-ruby1.8 > >>> Version: 1.8.2-7sarge2 > >>> Severity: serious > >>> > >>> The binary package libopenssl-ruby1.8 (pure GPL) depends on libssl0.9.7 > >>> (OpenSSL Licence). Those 2 licences conflict due to a clause in > >>> OpenSSL Licence which has to be added to the GPL. > >> Ruby is distributed with dual-license which is "Ruby's License" or GPL. > >> <URL:http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/LICENSE.txt> > > > > Absolutely, I am well aware of that. However, for that specific > > binary package, it is impossible to licence it under an unalterated > > GPL. Hence, the choice between the GPL or the Ruby Licence is not a > > choice: it is automatically the Ruby Licence. > > User of this package can use it as a source package. > And they can choise to build without OpenSSL. > So I think that debian/copyright has correct information. > > We may add this point as a note to libopenssl-ruby1.8.README.Debian, > but I think that it is not a serious bug.
It would be wise to do so. However, it is indeed a serious bug. I
did not set the severity to serious, because I found it funny to
annoy people, but rather because licences conflict violates the DFSG,
and by doing so, the Debian Policy.
Cheers.
--
((__,-"""-,__)) Aurélien GÉRÔME .---.
`--)~ ~(--` Free Software Developer / \
.-'( )`-. Unix Sys & Net Admin [EMAIL PROTECTED]@./
`~~`@) (@`~~` /`\_/`\
| | .''`. // _ \\
| | : :' : | \ )|_
(8___8) `. `'` /`\_`> <_/ \
`---` `- \__/'---'\__/
BOFH excuse #63: not properly grounded, please bury computer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
