Bug 465897 (Judy)
Summary: | Review Request: Judy - General purpose dynamic array library | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Charles R. Anderson <cra> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Mamoru TASAKA <mtasaka> |
Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | erik-fedora, fedora-package-review, greenrd, itamar, jochen, notting, paul |
Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | Reopened |
Target Release: | --- | Flags: | mtasaka:
fedora-review+
kevin: fedora-cvs+ |
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2008-12-21 19:39:15 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: | |||
Bug Depends On: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 437626 |
Description
Charles R. Anderson
2008-10-07 00:46:14 UTC
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 464429 *** *** Bug 464429 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Well, * License - README says LGPLv2, however all codes are under LGPLv2+. Would you ask the upstream about this? Currently to honor README file, the license tag must be "LGPLv2". * test program - As the tarball contains test/ subdirectory, please execute some test program at %check. You may have to set LD_FLAGS or LD_LIBRARY_PATH or so, or to modify test/Checkit to create test program correctly. ping? ping again? BTW, I'm already a sponsored packager now. Analyzing the license: The README file actually says LGPLv2.1 and refers to COPYING which is a copy of the LGPL v2.1: 4. LICENSE ---------- The user library is licensed under the GNU Lesser Public License (LGPL) Version 2.1, February 1999. The full text of the LGPL is located at: COPYING ------------------ Looking in COPYING it says LGPL v2.1 or later: Judy - C library functions for creating and accessing dynamic arrays Copyright (C) 2004 Doug Baskins This library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. ------------------ The source files have headers that mention the license as LGPLv2 or later, for example: ./src/JudyCommon/JudyMemUsed.c-// Copyright (C) 2000 - 2002 Hewlett-Packard Company ./src/JudyCommon/JudyMemUsed.c-// ./src/JudyCommon/JudyMemUsed.c-// This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it ./src/JudyCommon/JudyMemUsed.c:// under the term of the GNU Lesser General Public License as published by the ./src/JudyCommon/JudyMemUsed.c:// Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your ./src/JudyCommon/JudyMemUsed.c-// option) any later version. ./src/JudyCommon/JudyMemUsed.c-// I'll check with upstream which license they intended. Spec URL: http://cra.fedorapeople.org/Judy/Judy.spec SRPM URL: http://cra.fedorapeople.org/Judy/Judy-1.0.4-2.fc10.src.rpm Scratch Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=954819 * Thu Nov 27 2008 Charles R. Anderson <cra> 1.0.4-2 - patch tests to run with shared library - run tests in check section Why'd you CC me? You want me to continue with this review? (As I already started reviewing https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=464429 before it was pulled back) Re: Comment #8, I thought you'd like to be Cc'd since you were on the original review which was CLOSED/DUPLICATE--bugzilla usually does this automatically, but didn't in this case. If you'd like to help, extra eyes for review are always helpful. No worries either way. Thanks. For -2: * License tag - So until README file is fixed (or COPYING may be fixed) stay the license tag as "LGPLv2" ! Anyway on Fedora the license tag "LGPLv2.1+" is invalid. * Source0 - Using %name, %version (especially %{version}) is preferred: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#Using_.25.7Bversion.7D Spec URL: http://cra.fedorapeople.org/Judy/Judy.spec SRPM URL: http://cra.fedorapeople.org/Judy/Judy-1.0.4-3.fc10.src.rpm Scratch Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=964814 * Thu Nov 30 2008 Charles R. Anderson <cra> 1.0.4-3 - fix Judy1 man page symlinks - use valid tag License: LGPLv2+ confirmed with upstream - use version macro in Source0 - remove Makefiles from installed doc tree Regarding the license, upstream has confirmed that the current license is LGPL v2.1 or later. Also, the source code is really the final say on this, and it says "GNU Lesser General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version." Either way, Fedora spec files don't distinguish between v2.1 and v2, so this is specified as LGPLv2+ for the spec file. "From dougbaskins Thu Nov 27 21:45:54 2008 From: Doug Baskins <dougbaskins> To: Chuck Anderson <cra> Cc: judy-devel.net Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 18:45:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: Judy license confusion - (LGPL v2.1 or later applies) Reply-To: Doug Baskins <dougbaskins> Chuck: I did not know a new version of LGPL existed. You are correct, the COPYING file is correct (LGPL v2.1 or later applies). I will change the README file to reflect that in the next release of Judy. ..." However, the author has noted that the license may change in a future release to just LGPLv2. I'll be sure to update the License tag and notify fedora-devel-list if/when such a new release is imported into Fedora: "From dougbaskins Fri Nov 28 19:09:55 2008 From: Doug Baskins <dougbaskins> To: Chuck Anderson <cra> Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 16:09:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: Judy license confusion Reply-To: Doug Baskins <dougbaskins> Chuck: I have been requested by Hewlett-Packard to REMOVE the "or (at your option) later version" part of the wording from Judy sources. Apparently the v3 License is not acceptable to a lot of people and companies with regard to the patent section. If I do not do this, HP personnel cannot support me in the future. Sorry about that. I suspect that this problem will get sorted out in the future. (Sometimes I hate politics or perhaps Lawyers). Doug Doug Baskins <dougbaskins>" For -3: * License - Please include the reply from the upstream as %doc to show that this package is surely licensed under LGPLv2+. * build error - dist-f11 (rawhide) now uses libtool 2.2.6 and without ----------------------------------------------------- %prep %setup -q %patch0 -p1 -b .test-shared %patch1 -p1 -b .fix-Judy1-mans %if 0%{?fedora} >= 11 libtoolize --force %endif autoreconf ------------------------------------------------------ build fails: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=966046 ping? Spec URL: http://cra.fedorapeople.org/Judy/Judy.spec SRPM URL: http://cra.fedorapeople.org/Judy/Judy-1.0.4-4.fc10.src.rpm Scratch Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=996794 * Sat Dec 13 2008 Charles R. Anderson <cra> 1.0.4-4 - for Judy1 man page fix, patch Makefile.{am,in} instead of relying on autotools to regenerate the latter. - Add README.Fedora with upstream's license explanation. Okay. ------------------------------------------------------------- This package (Judy) is APPROVED by mtasaka ------------------------------------------------------------- New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: Judy Short Description: General purpose dynamic array Owners: cra Branches: F-10 InitialCC: cvs done. imported and built. thanks guys. Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: Judy New Branches: EL-4 EL-5 EL-6 Owners: pghmcfc I have just taken over maintenance of the Judy package from Charles. Co-maintainers welcome, as with all of my packages. CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py). |