search

hautreux / auks

Kerberos credential support for batch environments
Other
20 stars 18 forks source link

Licensing uncertainties #20

Closed imphil closed 8 years ago

imphil commented 8 years ago

Hi,

I'm currently in the progress of packaging auks for Debian/Ubuntu, and I found some strangeness regarding the licensing of auks.

What was intended here?

(Changing or dual-licensing to GPL or any other well-established license would make things significantly easier. I know, of course, that there are sometimes good reasons or requirements to choose a specific license.)

imphil commented 8 years ago

Ah, I got confused by the different versions. auks is CeCILL-C v1.0 (released on the same day as CeCILL without C v2.0). Since this license is not listed by the FSF and discussions in debian-legal were inconclusive (https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2008/01/msg00171.html), this will involve quite some work to get included :-(

hautreux commented 8 years ago

In my understanding, CeCill-C was compatible LGPL ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CeCILL). What is the exact issue regarding the integration ?

2016-07-19 22:12 GMT+02:00 Philipp Wagner notifications@github.com:

Ah, I got confused by the different versions. auks is CeCILL-C v1.0 (released on the same day as CeCILL without C v2.0). Since this license is not listed by the FSF and discussions in debian-legal were inconclusive ( https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2008/01/msg00171.html), this will involve quite some work to get included :-(

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/hautreux/auks/issues/20#issuecomment-233751239, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AA2ppxPl6syntlhQkMA_oikgeKvNvfhTks5qXS-sgaJpZM4JQGmh .

imphil commented 8 years ago

Debian requires a license review for licenses "unknown" to Debian (other distributions have similar procedures). I didn't find any other CeCILL-C licensed software package in Debian, making auks the first one. (In fact, not much software uses this license, it seems: http://www.cecill.info/logiciels.en.html) More details on the debian processes can be found here: https://www.debian.org/legal/licenses/ and https://wiki.debian.org/DFSGLicenses#If_the_license_isn.27t_on_this_list

While the current license is most likely not a showstopper for integration into Debian/Ubuntu, it will take come time and quite some effort to be sorted out. So if it would be possible on your side to relicense or dual-license auks, things would be much easier (just upload and be done, instead of a lengthy discussion with uncertain outcome about legal details).

hautreux commented 8 years ago

Ok, I will see what I can do for that, but I am not sure that it will take less time :(

2016-07-19 23:12 GMT+02:00 Philipp Wagner notifications@github.com:

Debian requires a license review for licenses "unknown" to Debian (other distributions have similar procedures). I didn't find any other CeCILL-C licensed software package in Debian, making auks the first one. (In fact, not much software uses this license, it seems: http://www.cecill.info/logiciels.en.html) More details on the debian processes can be found here: https://www.debian.org/legal/licenses/ and https://wiki.debian.org/DFSGLicenses#If_the_license_isn.27t_on_this_list

While the current license is most likely not a showstopper for integration into Debian/Ubuntu, it will take come time and quite some effort to be sorted out. So if it would be possible on your side to relicense or dual-license auks, things would be much easier (just upload and be done, instead of a lengthy discussion with uncertain outcome about legal details).

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/hautreux/auks/issues/20#issuecomment-233767424, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AA2ppxavGkjq-wAlYCBzjGCteQb2o3CSks5qXT2wgaJpZM4JQGmh .

hautreux commented 8 years ago

I think that I will move to an LGPL license if all the contributors agree. Do you think that it will be okay with such a license ?

imphil commented 8 years ago

Yes, LGPL will make it much easier to get auks into the distributions. Thanks for considering it!

hautreux commented 8 years ago

After talking with my colleagues, it appears that one of their product is included in debian/ubuntu using a Cecill-C license so it will not be an issue : https://packages.debian.org/en/sid/clustershell (see Copyright file)

Please reopen if necessary.