Re: [ptxdist] [ANNOUNCE] PTXdist 2014.10.0 released - license update patches

[Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@pengutronix.de>]

Am Dienstag, den 07.10.2014, 15:17 +0200 schrieb Andreas Pretzsch:
> On Do, 2014-10-02 at 15:14 +0200, Michael Olbrich wrote:
> > And a rather large stack of patches that
> > add license information to various patches.
> 
> Any reason why you did not pick up the below ones ?

Mostly because I have collected all the clear-cut cases first, missed a
few, and postponed others:

> From: 	Robert Schwebel <r.schwebel@pengutronix.de>
> 
> Subject: 	[ptxdist] [PATCH 02/36] binutils: add license information
> Date: 	Mon, 15 Sep 2014 22:18:04 +0200

The binutils version depends on the toolchain, and the license changed
from GPLv2+ to GPLv3+ some time ago. I guess a mechanism to add version
dependent license information is needed here. For now this can only be
set in the BSP, where the Toolchain version is known.

> Subject: 	[ptxdist] [PATCH 03/36] boost: add license information
> Date: 	Mon, 15 Sep 2014 22:18:05 +0200

Right, I wanted to question the Python-2.0 license.

The MIT license is listed because of the rapidxml-1.13 copy in
libs/geometry/doc/src/docutils/tools/doxygen_xml2qbk/contrib.
I didn't see any Python licensed code except the header file
boost/python/detail/python22_fixed.h, and that is from Python 2.2/2.2.1.
The python license changes (changed?) all the time, so I guess this
should be Python-2.2 or Python-2.2.1 instead.

[...]
> Subject: 	[ptxdist] [PATCH 18/36] libmd: add license information
> Date: 	Mon, 15 Sep 2014 22:18:20 +0200
>
> Subject: 	[ptxdist] [PATCH 33/36] xorg-font-alias: add license information
> Date: 	Mon, 15 Sep 2014 22:18:35 +0200
> 
> Subject: 	[ptxdist] [PATCH 34/36] xorg-font-ttf-bitstream-vera: add license information
> Date: 	Mon, 15 Sep 2014 22:18:36 +0200
> 
> Subject: 	[ptxdist] [PATCH 35/36] xorg-font-util: add license information
> Date: 	Mon, 15 Sep 2014 22:18:37 +0200
> 
> Subject: 	[ptxdist] [PATCH 36/36] xorg-fonts: add license information
> Date: 	Mon, 15 Sep 2014 22:18:38 +0200
>
> From: 	Andreas Pretzsch <apr@cn-eng.de>
> 
> Subject: 	[ptxdist] [PATCH 03/16] fontconfig: add license information
> Date: 	Sun, 28 Sep 2014 14:57:50 +0200

It is not clear to me if we want to list custom licenses each with their
own name in the license field, or if there should be some categorization
or catch-all values instead.

> Subject: 	[ptxdist] [PATCH 04/16] gcclibs: add license information
> Date: 	Sun, 28 Sep 2014 14:57:51 +0200

This suffers from the same problem as binutils.

[...]
> Subject: 	[ptxdist] [PATCH 29/36] screen: add license information
> Date: 	Mon, 15 Sep 2014 22:18:31 +0200
>
> Subject: 	[ptxdist] [PATCH] tomcat: add license information
> Date: 	Sun, 28 Sep 2014 15:31:50 +0200

I just have missed these when preparing the review branch.

regards
Philipp


-- 
ptxdist mailing list
ptxdist@pengutronix.de