Skip Menu |

This queue is for tickets about the Unix-Statgrab CPAN distribution.

Report information
The Basics
Id: 125519
Status: resolved
Priority: 0/
Queue: Unix-Statgrab

People
Owner: Nobody in particular
Requestors: DBOOK [...] cpan.org
Cc:
AdminCc:

Bug Information
Severity: (no value)
Broken in: (no value)
Fixed in: 0.112



Subject: Clarify distribution licensing?
This distribution indicates in metadata that it is licensed under the Perl 5 license (GPL 1+ or Artistic): https://metacpan.org/source/REHSACK/Unix-Statgrab-0.111/Makefile.PL#L105 , but each module indicates in POD that it is licensed under LGPL 2.1+. You can use the string 'lgpl_2_1' in ExtUtils::MakeMaker to indicate the LGPL 2.1 license, if the maintainers agree this was intended.
Unix::Statgrab itself is licensed under the Perl 5 license. The statgrab library itself and all it's header files are licensed under LGPL 2.1+. In case you want just distribute the perl module, with the API description in general, Perl5 license is fine. If you want distribute the entire package with all documents, Perl5 (for the Perl and XS code) AND LGLP 2.1+ is required, since the detailed description of the returned objects are LGPL. Does it help to understand?
On Thu Jun 07 15:32:40 2018, REHSACK wrote: Show quoted text
> Unix::Statgrab itself is licensed under the Perl 5 license. The > statgrab library itself and all it's header files are licensed under > LGPL 2.1+. > > In case you want just distribute the perl module, with the API > description in general, Perl5 license is fine. If you want distribute > the entire package with all documents, Perl5 (for the Perl and XS > code) AND LGLP 2.1+ is required, since the detailed description of the > returned objects are LGPL. > > Does it help to understand?
Hmm... this seems more confusing then. The file containing the module Unix::Statgrab explicitly states in POD that it is licensed as LGPL 2.1+. Thus I would assume that is the license it must be used under. The XS file does not specify any license itself, so I would assume it to be covered under the distribution (Perl 5) license. The rest of the files are just POD so not really a concern. I think the current setup does not completely convey how the licensing is intended. To cover how you describe it, I would mention the conjunction of both licenses in both the POD, XS code, and as the distribution license, possibly clarifying in the POD and XS code what each license applies to. Unfortunately I don't think there's a way to tell EUMM to set two licenses, but you could do it in META_MERGE ( https://metacpan.org/pod/CPAN::Meta::Spec#license ), I'm not sure how well it's supported...
On Thu Jun 07 16:29:15 2018, DBOOK wrote: Show quoted text
> but you could do it in META_MERGE ( > https://metacpan.org/pod/CPAN::Meta::Spec#license ), I'm not sure how > well it's supported...
Note this is separate from the 'license' field in resources.
I hope that's clear enough now.