[Issue 10093] Unclear licenses in certain places
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10093 --- Comment #4 from thege...@yandex-team.com --- Nothing is wrong, but using custom text without specific SPDX identifier makes it hard to do automatic license analysis (we use scancode-toolkit). Thanks for passing this to the SPDX project, Richard. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.
[Issue 10093] Unclear licenses in certain places
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10093 --- Comment #3 from Richard Fontana --- I found a comment by Juan C. Gomez here https://answers.launchpad.net/ubuntu-rtm/14.09-factory/+source/openldap/+copyright which I read as saying that their license notices should be treated as equivalent to the OpenLDAP license. Regarding the other one, I've submitted this to SPDX for potential inclusion in the SPDX license list with a distinct identifier. (https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2141) However, that is neither here nor there; Howard Chu is correct, there's nothing wrong with OpenLDAP's inclusion of code under this license and OpenLDAP should not be expected to care about SPDX identifiers if it doesn't want to. The reason this came to my attention is that we are using SPDX identifiers in the Fedora Project to classify licenses and for use in RPM package metadata. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.
[Issue 10093] Unclear licenses in certain places
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10093 Quanah Gibson-Mount changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|VERIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.
[Issue 10093] Unclear licenses in certain places
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10093 Quanah Gibson-Mount changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.
[Issue 10093] Unclear licenses in certain places
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10093 --- Comment #2 from Howard Chu --- As those headers clearly state, they are owned by their respective authors and the OpenLDAP Project has no authority to modify their license terms. We see no issue here since their redistribution terms are liberal and fully compatible with the OpenLDAP Public License. There is no action to take here, so this ticket will be closed. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.
[Issue 10093] Unclear licenses in certain places
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10093 Quanah Gibson-Mount changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|b...@openldap.org |h...@openldap.org Keywords|needs_review| -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.
[Issue 10093] Unclear licenses in certain places
https://bugs.openldap.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10093 --- Comment #1 from thege...@yandex-team.com --- Same problem also applies to libraries/libldap/os-local.c (lines 20..21) /* Portions (C) Copyright PADL Software Pty Ltd. 1999 * Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without * modification, are permitted provided that this notice is preserved * and that due credit is given to PADL Software Pty Ltd. This software * is provided ``as is'' without express or implied warranty. */ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue.
