[Popcon-developers] Bug#414865: popularity-contest: A script to filter requested/recommended/suggested packages

[Carsten Hey]

On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 06:14:43PM +0200, Christophe Lohr wrote:
> Carsten Hey a écrit :
> > I did just open popcon-retirement.sh and noticed that you did change the
> > license to GPL. 
> Sorry, I'm not very comfortable with licensing issues.

Such things are not that complicated: You are allowed to add additional
restrictions/extensions (like "you are not allowed to use this code when
you wear a blue t-shirt") to any code you redistribute, unless the
original license requires that forks must allow redistribution unter the
same license, which does the GPL in any version.  Adding exceptions like
the famous OpenSSL exception, which allows GPLed code to be linked
against OpenSSL, although the GPL actually forbids this, is only
permitted when you are the only copyright holder of the code or all
copyright holders agree, the same applies for adding additional
licenses, as you did with adding GPL1.  Additionally you must preserve
all Copyright statements and the license notice itself, unless you are
allowed to remove one license, for example when the code is dual
licensed, like orphaner (in that case you must preserve at least one
license notice) or when the license explicitly permits this (see WTFPL).

"GPL" is, though unclear, mostly interpreted as GPL version 1, and GPL
1 says you are allowed to redistribute it under any version of the GPL,
"GPL" without mentioning the version should be avoided.  Since different
GPL version are incompatible to each other, which means that you are not
allowed to use software published under this licenses in one work, using
the phrase "or, at your option any later version" is preferable if you
are in the position to choose a license and you want a copyleft license.
Examples are "GPL 2 or any later version" or, if you want to use the
additional restrictions regarding patenting "GPL 3 or any later
version".  Well known alternatives to copyleft licenses are the BSD like
licenses, for example the 2-clause BSD license, these licenses provide
more freedom to your users but don't ensure that forks of the software
you wrote remain free, so anybody can create commercial software based
on BSD licensed code without the need to publish the source code.

If you understand what I wrote you know more than most people, even in
the free software world, about licenses and copyright :)

> So, here is "v0.2"

The license and the copyright are ok now, thanks.

If somebody in the future will ask why you don't support whiptail
(people do this from time to time) please point them to
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/deborphan/+bug/347913/+index

As already said, I will take a closer look at your software, but it
might take a few days before I actually start doing so.


Regards
Carsten