Bug 988820 - dblatex: incorrect license tag
Summary: dblatex: incorrect license tag
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: dblatex
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Michael J Gruber
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2013-07-26 13:32 UTC by Stanislav Ochotnicky
Modified: 2013-08-19 21:28 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version: dblatex-0.3.4-8.fc19
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2013-08-19 21:24:40 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
proposed patch (6.52 KB, patch)
2013-07-29 09:23 UTC, Stanislav Ochotnicky
no flags Details | Diff
Proposed patch no. 2 (1.56 KB, patch)
2013-07-29 11:51 UTC, Stanislav Ochotnicky
no flags Details | Diff

Description Stanislav Ochotnicky 2013-07-26 13:32:28 UTC
Description of problem:
dblatex states license to be GPLv2+, however parts of the package have MIT and other licenses (one unknown, see bug 988715).

Upstream provides pretty nice licensing overview in COPYRIGHT file. Most likely not all files will affect license of binary RPM but licensing should be re-reviewed and comment added into spec file with details.

Comment 1 Stanislav Ochotnicky 2013-07-29 09:06:35 UTC
As was discussed in bug 988715, the license of XSL stylesheets is "DMIT". I have also found following files with different licenses in source tarball:

 * bibtopic.sty - GPLv2+
 * enumitem.sty (source tarball only), ragged2e.sty (source tarball only), multirow2.sty (binary RPM too) - LPPL
 * lastpage.sty - GPLv2
 * passivetex(source tarball only), python-which(unbundled) - MIT


With that I'd say the license tag of binary RPM is:
License: GPLv2+ and DMIT and LPPL and GPLv2

MIT is not there because none of MIT sources are included in binary RPms.

Comment 2 Stanislav Ochotnicky 2013-07-29 09:23:39 UTC
Created attachment 779700 [details]
proposed patch

Comment 3 Stanislav Ochotnicky 2013-07-29 11:51:09 UTC
Created attachment 779818 [details]
Proposed patch no. 2

Actually lib/dbtexmf/core/sgmlent.txt is Public Domain so add that to the list. If you want to use this patch with git am, apply previous one as well.

Comment 4 Michael J Gruber 2013-08-08 14:50:37 UTC
Thanks for the patches, currently building on rawhide:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5794686


How far should I merge this down? F19, F18?

Comment 5 Stanislav Ochotnicky 2013-08-08 15:13:44 UTC
Since it's all fast-forward merges for F18+ I'd say build older ones as well (including the updates in bodhi). It shouldn't be much work I guess

Comment 6 Fedora Update System 2013-08-09 09:14:42 UTC
dblatex-0.3.4-8.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/dblatex-0.3.4-8.fc19

Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2013-08-09 09:15:57 UTC
dblatex-0.3.4-8.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/dblatex-0.3.4-8.fc18

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2013-08-10 03:54:20 UTC
Package dblatex-0.3.4-8.fc18:
* should fix your issue,
* was pushed to the Fedora 18 testing repository,
* should be available at your local mirror within two days.
Update it with:
# su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=updates-testing dblatex-0.3.4-8.fc18'
as soon as you are able to.
Please go to the following url:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-14538/dblatex-0.3.4-8.fc18
then log in and leave karma (feedback).

Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2013-08-19 21:24:40 UTC
dblatex-0.3.4-8.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 10 Fedora Update System 2013-08-19 21:28:07 UTC
dblatex-0.3.4-8.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.