search

Tux / System-Info

System::Info - basic information about the system
1 stars 6 forks source link

copyright of t/etc/netbsd-*/release #1

Closed carandraug closed 7 years ago

carandraug commented 7 years ago

The t/etc/netbsd-*/release have a copyright notice as such:

Copyright (c) 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005,
    2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015
    The NetBSD Foundation, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Copyright (c) 1982, 1986, 1989, 1991, 1993
    The Regents of the University of California.  All rights reserved.

and

Copyright (c) 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005,
    2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013
    The NetBSD Foundation, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Copyright (c) 1982, 1986, 1989, 1991, 1993
    The Regents of the University of California.  All rights reserved.

which causes issues for packaging in Debian. Could you please clarify the situation?

Tux commented 7 years ago

t/etc collects all files that share information on the OS that the folder describes. This in order to have a test suite that represents reality. t/etc/get-lsb.pl and t/etc/get-lsb.sh will gether that information on Linux-like systems, and I store the in the test folder to use that as fake /etc to analyse the system's release information

Those files represent the copyright as stated on the OS I fetched them from.

If you have any OS release that is not in that list I really want the output of get-lsb.pl to make the functioning of this module more reliable.

As such, these copyright notices have nothing to do with the copyright of the module System::Info

On Fri, 12 May 2017 03:46:25 -0700, Carnë Draug notifications@github.com wrote:

The t/etc/netbsd-*/release have a copyright notice as such:

Copyright (c) 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005,
    2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015
    The NetBSD Foundation, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Copyright (c) 1982, 1986, 1989, 1991, 1993
    The Regents of the University of California.  All rights reserved.

and

Copyright (c) 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005,
    2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013
    The NetBSD Foundation, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Copyright (c) 1982, 1986, 1989, 1991, 1993
    The Regents of the University of California.  All rights reserved.

which causes issues for packaging in Debian. Could you please clarify the situation?

-- H.Merijn Brand http://tux.nl Perl Monger http://amsterdam.pm.org/ using perl5.00307 .. 5.25 porting perl5 on HP-UX, AIX, and openSUSE http://mirrors.develooper.com/hpux/ http://www.test-smoke.org/ http://qa.perl.org http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/

carandraug commented 7 years ago

On 12 May 2017 at 15:54, H.Merijn Brand notifications@github.com wrote:

t/etc collects all files that share information on the OS that the folder describes. This in order to have a test suite that represents reality. t/etc/get-lsb.pl and t/etc/get-lsb.sh will gether that information on Linux-like systems, and I store the in the test folder to use that as fake /etc to analyse the system's release information

Those files represent the copyright as stated on the OS I fetched them from.

So t/etc/netbsd-6.99.24/release and t/etc/netbsd-7.99.4/release are copies of the files found in NetBSD systems. From that file only, NetBSD Foundation claims copyright of those files with "All rights reserved" which seems would make the file contents non-free. Would that file be in a context that specifies its license better?

If you have any OS release that is not in that list I really want the output of get-lsb.pl to make the functioning of this module more reliable.

As such, these copyright notices have nothing to do with the copyright of the module System::Info

Note that the test files are distributed by Debian too in the "source" packages. So while this has nothing to do with the copyright of the System::Info module, it still affects a file distributed and needs to be free.

Tux commented 7 years ago

On Fri, 12 May 2017 09:22:24 -0700, Carnë Draug notifications@github.com wrote:

On 12 May 2017 at 15:54, H.Merijn Brand notifications@github.com wrote:

t/etc collects all files that share information on the OS that the folder describes. This in order to have a test suite that represents reality. t/etc/get-lsb.pl and t/etc/get-lsb.sh will gether that information on Linux-like systems, and I store the in the test folder to use that as fake /etc to analyse the system's release information

Those files represent the copyright as stated on the OS I fetched them from.

So t/etc/netbsd-6.99.24/release and t/etc/netbsd-7.99.4/release are copies of the files found in NetBSD systems. From that file only, NetBSD Foundation claims copyright of those files with "All rights reserved" which seems would make the file contents non-free. Would that file be in a context that specifies its license better?

If the contents of those files are a bother, don't ship them in the release: they are only used for testing. If you remove those folders and the matching lines in MANIFEST, the module will work just the same.

Sorry if I am not very specific, but this is a new area to me.

If you have any OS release that is not in that list I really want the output of get-lsb.pl to make the functioning of this module more reliable.

As such, these copyright notices have nothing to do with the copyright of the module System::Info

Note that the test files are distributed by Debian too in the "source" packages. So while this has nothing to do with the copyright of the System::Info module, it still affects a file distributed and needs to be free.

I am by far an expert on copyright stuff and you made me wonder if the files that claim the copyright fall under the copyright itself. If that is true, I'll probably better just remove those tests and files from the distribution altogether.

And yes, I very much appreciate your feedback and questions. It makes me more aware of what happens out there. Thank you for your patience.

-- H.Merijn Brand http://tux.nl Perl Monger http://amsterdam.pm.org/ using perl5.00307 .. 5.25 porting perl5 on HP-UX, AIX, and openSUSE http://mirrors.develooper.com/hpux/ http://www.test-smoke.org/ http://qa.perl.org http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/

carandraug commented 7 years ago

On 12 May 2017 at 18:21, H.Merijn Brand notifications@github.com wrote:

On Fri, 12 May 2017 09:22:24 -0700, Carnë Draug notifications@github.com wrote:

On 12 May 2017 at 15:54, H.Merijn Brand notifications@github.com wrote:

t/etc collects all files that share information on the OS that the folder describes. This in order to have a test suite that represents reality. t/etc/get-lsb.pl and t/etc/get-lsb.sh will gether that information on Linux-like systems, and I store the in the test folder to use that as fake /etc to analyse the system's release information

Those files represent the copyright as stated on the OS I fetched them from.

So t/etc/netbsd-6.99.24/release and t/etc/netbsd-7.99.4/release are copies of the files found in NetBSD systems. From that file only, NetBSD Foundation claims copyright of those files with "All rights reserved" which seems would make the file contents non-free. Would that file be in a context that specifies its license better?

If the contents of those files are a bother, don't ship them in the release: they are only used for testing. If you remove those folders and the matching lines in MANIFEST, the module will work just the same.

Sorry if I am not very specific, but this is a new area to me.

If you have any OS release that is not in that list I really want the output of get-lsb.pl to make the functioning of this module more reliable.

As such, these copyright notices have nothing to do with the copyright of the module System::Info

Note that the test files are distributed by Debian too in the "source" packages. So while this has nothing to do with the copyright of the System::Info module, it still affects a file distributed and needs to be free.

I am by far an expert on copyright stuff and you made me wonder if the files that claim the copyright fall under the copyright itself. If that is true, I'll probably better just remove those tests and files from the distribution altogether.

And yes, I very much appreciate your feedback and questions. It makes me more aware of what happens out there. Thank you for your patience.

Those files simply claim to be copyrighted and all rights reserved by the copyright holders. In the context of the NetBSD distribution, it doesn't make much sense to me but that's what it is written in the file.

Maybe this is like those projects where there's a single copyright notice file and the individual files only have the name of the copyright holders. Or maybe they never meant to copyright the file, instead they are claiming copyright of the whole distribution and you are supposed to get the actual license from somewhere else.

Could you bring this up with the NetBSD people? If there is a note somewhere that says that those files are actually under license X, or that they are not copyrightable and NetBSD people did not intend to claim copyright over it, that would solve it.

I can remove that file from the Debian release, but the closer the Debian package can be to the upstream release the better.

Carnë

carandraug commented 7 years ago

I have requested clarification from NetBSD who state that the copyright notice in the file is part of the information about that release. It is not a copyright claim over that file. See http://mail-index.netbsd.org/netbsd-users/2017/07/13/msg019836.html

Tux commented 7 years ago

Thank you. Does this mean I can leave that file in?

carandraug commented 7 years ago

Thank you. Does this mean I can leave that file in?

Yes. I left a comment on the debian file explaining the situation and it got accepted. See https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-perl/packages/libsystem-info-perl.git/commit/?id=02f03414bdd530c9b87e360b52ef9b7bf90b1f8b

Tux commented 7 years ago

Thanks for all the time and effort you put into this! Really appreciated