Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 249212
Review Request: inchi - The IUPAC International Chemical Identifier library
Last modified: 2007-12-12 14:33:15 EST
Spec URL: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/inchi.spec
SRPM URL: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/inchi-1.0.1-8.src.rpm
The IUPAC International Chemical Identifier (InChITM) is a non-proprietary identifier for chemical substances that can be used in printed and electronic data sources thus enabling easier linking of diverse data compilations. It was developed under IUPAC Project 2000-025-1-800 during the period 2000-2004. Details of the project and the history of its progress are available from the project web site.
This was originally built from sources included in openbabel. Release 8 is necessary to maintain a proper upgrade path. I have a pending change for openbabel in devel to build against this already.
> License: LGPL
Not necessary to do this in the -devel package.
> If you are going to develop programs which will use this library
> you should install inchi-devel. You'll also need to have the
> inchi package installed.
Is this part necessary?
Licensing is confusing...
- It implies trademark integrity within the context of copyright terms.
- It implies a "request" of copyright advertisement clause, but it seems
non-binding by this language. Is this the intent?
- None of the source files contain proper copyright notices.
1) Upstream should clear up this confusion by creating a clear separation
between the copyright and trademark rights. Copyright explicitly LGPL, and have
a separate page/file containing the trademark guidelines.
As an example, Mozilla uses a trademark guideline to protect the integrity of
their mark, without running afoul of the (L)GPL requirement of "no additional
restrictions" on the copyright.
2) All source files must contain a proper and explicit copyright notice. To
quote LGPL: " You must give prominent notice with each copy of the work that the
Library is used in it and that the Library and its use are covered by this
License." Under the terms of the LGPL, those copyright statements would of
course not be removed by others.
Will this reply:
suffice to get this review a green light?
Given that this package is fine split, I'd rather wait until the upstream source
is fully fixed and explicitly clarified before approving this. IANAL, but
upstream merely stating "go ahead" doesn't satisfy #2 above.
Looks like they did exactly as we asked. Updated package here:
Excellent, the licensing is FAR less confusing and explicit now.
Possibly a few more issues to deal with before approval:
[builder1@newcaprica x86_64]$ rpmlint inchi-1.0.2-0.1.fc8.x86_64.rpm
inchi.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/inchi-1.0.2/LICENSE
inchi.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
inchi.x86_64: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/lib64/libinchi.so.1
inchi.x86_64: W: invalid-license LGPL
inchi.x86_64: E: invalid-ldconfig-symlink /usr/lib64/libinchi.so.1.02.00
The invalid-license warning is a must fix. Please refer to the licensing
guidelines to use a label that is more specific to the LGPL license and version.
The symlink warning and errors are possibly suspect, please look into that.
OK, everything is fixed and rpmlint is completely silent. Good job.
New Package CVS Request
Package Name: inchi
Short Description: The IUPAC International Chemical Identifier library
Branches: F-8 F-7
Cvsextras Commits: yes
Thanks for the review!
Built for devel. Builds for other branches will follow after I've updated openbabel.
Package Change Request
Package Name: inchi
New Branches: EL-5