Okay. Many thanks for digging into this and checking. On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 5:23 AM, Robert Kausch <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I mention this because this is why libcdio-paranoia and libcdio were split >> in the first place: we couldn't mix GPL 3 or later with GPL 2 only or >> LGPL. >> > > Dug a bit deeper; the problem at that time was mixing GPL 3 or later with > GPL 2 only. libcdio included cdparanoia 9.8 code which was released as GPL > 2 only, so when libcdio changed to GPL 3 or later, there was a problem. The > licenses are not compatible, so the split was necessary at that point. > > Later, libcdio-paranoia upgraded to cdparanoia 10.0 and then 10.2 which > changed the license to LGPL 2.1 only for the library and GPL 2 or later for > the tool. Both allow distributing derivative works under the GPL 3 or > later, so there's no problem anymore. > > Am 26.09.2014 um 08:10 schrieb Rocky Bernstein: > >> I updated the libcdio-paranoia license to GPLv3 to match libcdio. >>> >> I am not sure we can do this. >> >> GPLv2 I think means GPLv2 and *only* GPLv2. LGPL of Paranoia 10.2 allows >> LGPL 2.1 or later but I don't think GPL. >> >> I mention this because this is why libcdio-paranoia and libcdio were split >> in the first place: we couldn't mix GPL 3 or later with GPL 2 only or >> LGPL. >> >> I am sorry for the confusion and apologize that I wasn't clear about the >> history of this before. >> >> Although I don't care to spend time thinking much about this, there are >> lots of other people inside and outside the project that do. >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 6:32 PM, Robert Kausch <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> I updated the libcdio-paranoia license to GPLv3 to match libcdio. Also >>> updated two files in the libcdio tree that were still GPLv2. >>> >>> @Nicolas: Please have a look at the sources at https://github.com/rocky/ >>> libcdio-paranoia. Everything should be consistent now. >>> >>> Am 25.09.2014 um 15:09 schrieb Rocky Bernstein: >>> >>> Ok. Would you and Nicolas make the changes as appropriate? I'll hold >>> off >>> >>>> on >>>> a release after you both go over this. Thanks. >>>> >>>> On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 8:35 AM, Robert Kausch <[email protected] >>>> > >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Had a look at libcdio again and realized it's GPL only. >>>> >>>>> In that case, I think we should go the other way and make >>>>> libcdio-paranoia >>>>> GPL only as well. It cannot be used without libcdio anyway so anything >>>>> using it would have to be GPL anyway. The LGPL option for >>>>> libcdio-paranoia >>>>> does not really make sense in that case. >>>>> >>>>> Robert >>>>> >>>>> Am 25.09.2014 um 14:27 schrieb Robert Kausch: >>>>> >>>>> Hi Rocky, >>>>> >>>>> I had a look at the licenses of cdparanoia 10.2 and cdio-paranoia >>>>>> source >>>>>> files. >>>>>> >>>>>> In cdparanoia, the only files that carry a GPL license are cachetest.c >>>>>> and main.c (which would be cd-paranoia.c in cdio-paranoia). Everything >>>>>> else, including the whole library, is LGPL licensed. >>>>>> >>>>>> In cdio-paranoia about half the files are GPL, the other half LGPL. I >>>>>> think this is because the license of cdparanoia used to be the GPL >>>>>> until >>>>>> svn revision 14871. In revision 14872, they changed the license to >>>>>> LGPL, >>>>>> but that switch was never made in cdio-paranoia. >>>>>> >>>>>> As cdio-paranoia is now based on the latest cdparanoia release which, >>>>>> except for the two files mentioned above, is LGPL licensed, we could >>>>>> change >>>>>> the license to LGPL as well. Only the cd-paranoia tool would still >>>>>> have >>>>>> to >>>>>> be GPL licensed. >>>>>> >>>>>> Tell me what you think. >>>>>> >>>>>> Robert >>>>>> >>>>>> Am 15.09.2014 um 13:43 schrieb Rocky Bernstein: >>>>>> >>>>>> My intent was to make this identical to >>>>>> >>>>>>> http://downloads.xiph.org/releases/cdparanoia/ >>>>>>> cdparanoia-III-10.2.src.tgz >>>>>>> from https://www.xiph.org/paranoia/down.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I may have botched things though. If there are discrepancies, I'd >>>>>>> appreciate it if you or others would fix and make a pull request off >>>>>>> of >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> git repository https://github.com/rocky/libcdio-paranoia >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I see that doc/FAQ.txt isn't in the source mentioned above. So maybe >>>>>>> we >>>>>>> remove that file? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 5:56 AM, Nicolas Boullis < >>>>>>> [email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Rocky, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 08, 2014 at 05:17:26AM -0400, Rocky Bernstein wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Lastly, the doc/FAQ.txt file has a copyright notice, with the "All >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> rights reserved." sentence. Isn't it non-free? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Sorry for bothering you, but do you have an opinion on this one? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I cannot start the Debian transition to libcdio 0.92 (or the >>>>>>>> upcoming >>>>>>>> 0.93) without packages for libcdio-paranoia, and I cannot ship a >>>>>>>> non-free documentation within Debian main. >>>>>>>> Do you have a reason to think this file is free? Or should I use a >>>>>>>> stripped-down tarball? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Nicolas >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>> > >
