Skip Menu |

This queue is for tickets about the Class-Singleton CPAN distribution.

Report information
The Basics
Id: 132843
Status: resolved
Priority: 0/
Queue: Class-Singleton
People
Owner: Nobody in particular
Requestors: KENTNL [...] cpan.org
Cc:
AdminCc:
Bug Information
Severity: (no value)
Broken in: (no value)
Fixed in: 1.6

History Show all quoted text
  Thu Jun 18 23:51:21 2020 KENTNL [...] cpan.org - Ticket created
Subject: Possible license confusion
I found a single ambiguity mentioned in the Changelog which didn't really make sense to me:

----

./Changes:17:* Changed licence from Perl Artistic to the same terms as Perl itself
./Changes-18-  (e.g. Artistic 2.0/GPL)

----

All other files that mention license seem to be clear:

---

./lib/Class/Singleton.pm-379-This module is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
./lib/Class/Singleton.pm:380:modify it under the same terms as Perl itself.
./README-259-
./README-260-    This module is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
./README:261:    under the same terms as Perl itself.

----

But I feel obligated to point out that "same as Perl itself" is, to the best of my understanding *NOT* "Artistic-2.0/GPL", but is instead, Artistic-1.0 OR GPL1-OR-GREATER

Thus, its possible that how this was intended to be licensed, and how it was actually licensed, diverge in some, possibly substantial way.

I'd suggest either fixing the confusing changelog message,  or if the message carried the intent, change all the other mentions to something more correct.


-- 
- CPAN kentnl@cpan.org
- Gentoo Perl Maintainer kentnl@gentoo.org ( perl@gentoo.org )
  Tue Oct 27 04:11:06 2020 shay [...] cpan.org - Correspondence added
On Thu Jun 18 23:51:21 2020, KENTNL wrote: Show quoted text
> I found a single ambiguity mentioned in the Changelog which didn't > really make > sense to me: > > ---- > > ./Changes:17:* Changed licence from Perl Artistic to the same terms as > Perl > itself > ./Changes-18- (e.g. Artistic 2.0/GPL) > > ---- > > All other files that mention license seem to be clear: > > --- > > ./lib/Class/Singleton.pm-379-This module is free software; you can > redistribute > it and/or > ./lib/Class/Singleton.pm:380:modify it under the same terms as Perl > itself. > ./README-259- > ./README-260- This module is free software; you can redistribute it > and/or > modify it > ./README:261: under the same terms as Perl itself. > > ---- > > But I feel obligated to point out that "same as Perl itself" is, to > the best of > my understanding *NOT* "Artistic-2.0/GPL", but is instead, Artistic- > 1.0 OR > GPL1-OR-GREATER > > Thus, its possible that how this was intended to be licensed, and how > it was > actually licensed, diverge in some, possibly substantial way. > > I'd suggest either fixing the confusing changelog message, or if the > message > carried the intent, change all the other mentions to something more > correct. >
Thanks, and apologies for the slow response. The Changelog entry refers to release 1.4 and comparing that with 1.03 I see that Andy, the distro's previous maintainer, changed the text in Singleton.pm and README from "you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the term of the Perl Artistic License" to "you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the same terms as Perl itself", so I think the Changelog entry is simply wrong in (mis-)explaining that terms of Perl itself are Artistic 2.0/GPL when in fact it is Artistic/GPLv1+ as you say. I will correct the Changelog text in the next release, which I will hopefully make soon.
  Tue Oct 27 04:11:06 2020 The RT System itself - Status changed from 'new' to 'open'
  Wed Dec 02 13:09:57 2020 shay [...] cpan.org - Correspondence added
Thanks again. This is now fixed in version 1.6, released today.
  Wed Dec 02 13:09:58 2020 shay [...] cpan.org - Status changed from 'open' to 'resolved'
  Wed Dec 02 13:09:58 2020 shay [...] cpan.org - Fixed in 1.6 added