Open Lupphes opened 3 months ago
If I understand the problem correctly, it is more of a packaging problem than a licensing problem. The jar
files stored in the extensions/
and tools/
folders are already provided by other projects (i.e. xalan is provided by ant-apache-xalan2), so there is no need for this project to include them, but you should add them as dependencies to be installed.
Looking from a broader perspective, this problem is affecting many distributions, including Fedora, and several core projects, like PAM.
So having it fixed upstream instead of removing those files per distribution will help sanitize the state of the project and will avoid future issues when other distributions start complaining about this problem.
I've done a bit of research on the packages.
Not all of the JAR files are from Oasis but from other 3rd-party companies/projects. Some of these packages are not even available in Fedora anymore as they are orphaned.
Files are in Fedora in a different package:
Orphaned Fedora Packages --- File was not in Fedora
It needs to be Built from the Source
Additionally, there are a few files that may also packaged by accident:
slides/slidy/scripts/slidy.js.gz
roundtrip/template.dot
slides/slidy/graphics/nofold.bmp
slides/slidy/graphics/nofold-dim.bmp
slides/slidy/graphics/unfold.bmp
slides/slidy/graphics/fold-dim.bmp
slides/slidy/graphics/unfold-dim.bmp
slides/slidy/graphics/fold.bmp
doc/reference.txt.gz # Old release, probably already deleted
.bmp
files, currently without a specified license, are used for howto
documentation, such as docbook-5.0/tools/db4-entities.pl
script. Both of them should license be verified.
While updating a license for the Fedora package
docbook5-style-xsl
, the legal team discovered that we were unintentionally packaging multiple JAR binaries from the package'stools/
folder.The binary files are downloaded from the repository and then packed with RPM, which is shipped.
In the past, this problem was present just for the folder
extensions/
, which is not packaged into Fedora (if statement in the spec file). However, after closer inspection, we found thetools/
folder and two additional files, which do not present a problem. All binaries listed:These files:
Can probably be easily removed as
slidy.js.gz
is just an accidental archive and a text document'stemplate.dot
preamble. The rest of the files are JAR binary files.The final JAR files should not be shipped in the release, nor should there be a way to build them if required. Could you please provide some guidance on this?
Related BZ: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2260534