Hello,
I am not a stakeholder in this discussion, however this has been
discussed
already here and here is my opinion :
Le 2014-11-05 02:09, Andreas Bombe a écrit :
For the record, the current license (the files in the ghdl source
aren't
currently updated to contain this license header) is:
| This source file is an essential part of IEEE Std 1076-2008,
| IEEE Standard VHDL Language Reference Manual. Verbatim copies of this
| source file may be used and distributed without restriction.
That's the first point and the only one that really matters.
Because it's a description of the standard. It's public.
It's an interface.
| Modifications to this source file as permitted in IEEE Std 1076-2008
| may also be made and distributed. All other uses require permission
| from the IEEE Standards Department([email protected]).
| All other rights reserved.
http://standards.ieee.org/news/2013/ieee_1076_vhdl.html
http://standards.ieee.org/downloads/1076/1076-2008/
I told Joris in private mail that this is almost free according to
Debian guidelines, except that modifications are only allowed within a
limited range. Well, also that it has a bit of ambiguous language
(modifications may be distributed, but does that mean the modified
files
or really just the modification, i.e. a patch?). I now realized that it
is also missing the permission to distribute binaries compiled from
these sources.
It may be a reason to nitpick for Debian, but IEEE would not really care
because in practice
- there is no point in making significant changes to the files because
they are a standard.
- these copyright notices were created to allow big bad companies to
use the standard with granting them all the powers and disrupt standard
adoption.
- We could rewrite whatever we want. Indeed, a young french man wrote a
VHDL compiler in VHDL. We wouldn't bother subverting the definition
files or mess with copyright, so we clearly use the files to comply with
the standard, which is the actual purpose of the files...
- modifications are explicitly not forbidden.
These limitations are no practical problem for ghdl itself, just for
inclusion in Debian with its high standard of software freeness. That
is
if the copyright on the spec files is actually relevant.
That's my opinion too.
Copyright requires some creative work and for computer programs even
the
most minimal creativity is generally considered sufficient. But we're
talking about standard packages. If the standard says that package P
contains a function F with result type X and two arguments of type Y,
then writing that declaration does not involve any creativity just mere
typing work.
Possibility A) The license does not matter because the spec files
(again, I assume bodies are not compiled) are not copyrightable due to
lack of creativity.
I agree with this.
Debian could bitch but these files are not the same as real source code
that defines algorithms. They are interfaces and don't have the same
requirements as "implementation" source code.
Possibility B) Let's strip the comments except the copyright header to
remove any traces of creativity, then same as A).
I don't see why.
Possibility C) Let's write our own uncreative spec files adhering to
the
standard. A bit of work, but we wouldn't depend on any legal
interpretation and the compiled simulations are also unquestionably
distributable.
That's useless, IMHO
For the sake of completeness, the undesirable
now-that's-probably-going-too-far options:
Possibility D) We may distribute, but the files aren't DFSG free, so
put
the ghdl package in Debian's non-free section.
It would be a shame, and useless...
Possibility E) Distribute without the standard files and have the
package download them on installation.
Maybe but what about network-less installation ?
Let's avoid this, please.
F) don't raise the issue with Debian, eventually document/explain the
situation with a text file in the same directory.
Anyway, I'm for A, and education of the Debian maintainers.
Andreas
YG
_______________________________________________
Ghdl-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/ghdl-discuss
