Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 491425
Review Request: R-RODBC - An ODBC database interface for R
Last modified: 2009-03-31 16:35:55 EDT
Spec URL: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/new/R-RODBC.spec
SRPM URL: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/new/R-RODBC-1.2-1.fc11.src.rpm
Description: An ODBC database interface for R
R-biglm (one of my other packages) grew this as a new dependency in its latest release, so I need this in order to update it.
Created attachment 336169 [details]
I attach my review. Package looks good except for some minor license issues that need clarification.
Quoting from your review:
The license statement in these files:
all say GPL2 or GPL3, which is the same as the spec file states, but
says GPL version 2 or any later version.
and RODBC/COPYING only contains the GPL2 license text.
GPLv2 or GPLv3 is functionally equivalent to GPLv2 or any later version (as the only later version is GPLv3).
(In reply to comment #2)
> GPLv2 or GPLv3 is functionally equivalent to GPLv2 or any later version (as the
> only later version is GPLv3).
This is true right now. But it will stop being true the moment a new version of GPL is published, and you can not rely on that a new version of GPL will never ever be released. If upstream will not change the license so that all files are released under the same license, the Fedora package must state all licenses, which will be something like:
License: GPLv2+ and (GPLv2 or GPLv3)
It will be a rather weird statement - preferably upstream should be asked about their inconsistent licensing, so that it can be resolved for something more reasonable. If upstream is unable or unwilling to change it, you should state all licenses as above.
Yes, however, since those files are compiled together, the most restrictive license applies to the whole work, which is the GPLv2 or GPLv3 license.
But they are not compiled together in a single binary. The C file under the GPLv2+ license is compiled into the RODBC.so library, and the R files under GPLv2 or GPLv3 are compiled into the RODBC.rdb and RODBC.rdx. So RODBC.so ends up with a different license than the rest of the package.
Ahh, okay. Fixed in -2:
New SRPM: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/new/R-RODBC-1.2-2.fc11.src.rpm
New SPEC: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/new/R-RODBC.spec
New Package CVS Request
Package Name: R-RODBC
Short Description: An ODBC database interface for R
Branches: F-9 F-10 devel
... and it's done.
R-RODBC-1.2-2.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9.
R-RODBC-1.2-2.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10.
R-RODBC-1.2-2.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
R-RODBC-1.2-2.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.