Skip Menu |

This queue is for tickets about the FCGI-ProcManager CPAN distribution.

Report information
The Basics
Id: 133201
Status: open
Priority: 0/
Queue: FCGI-ProcManager
People
Owner: Nobody in particular
Requestors: KENTNL [...] cpan.org
Cc:
AdminCc:
Bug Information
Severity: (no value)
Broken in: (no value)
Fixed in: (no value)

History Show all quoted text
  Fri Aug 21 01:20:28 2020 KENTNL [...] cpan.org - Ticket created
Subject: Ambiguous licensing
Many files in this distribution indicate they're under "LGPL2.1" (only) but some stipulate "LGPL2 or newer", in some cases, the declarations are stated twice, with conflicting indications


./lib/FCGI/ProcManager.pm (~line 5) <-- LGPL2.1
./lib/FCGI/ProcManager.pm (~line 724) <-- LGPL2 OR NEWER
./Makefile.PL (~line 5) <-- LGPL2.1
./t/procmanager_constrained.pm (~line 4) <-- LGPL2.1
./README (~line 50) <-- LGPL2.1

Looking at this it gives the impression the line 724 declaration in ProcManager.pm is the error.


-- 
- CPAN kentnl@cpan.org
- Gentoo Perl Maintainer kentnl@gentoo.org ( perl@gentoo.org )
  Fri Aug 21 01:40:23 2020 ARODLAND [...] cpan.org - Correspondence added
On Fri Aug 21 01:20:28 2020, KENTNL wrote: Show quoted text
> Many files in this distribution indicate they're under "LGPL2.1" (only) but > some stipulate "LGPL2 or newer", in some cases, the declarations are stated > twice, with conflicting indications > > > ./lib/FCGI/ProcManager.pm (~line 5) <-- LGPL2.1 > ./lib/FCGI/ProcManager.pm (~line 724) <-- LGPL2 OR NEWER > ./Makefile.PL (~line 5) <-- LGPL2.1 > ./t/procmanager_constrained.pm (~line 4) <-- LGPL2.1 > ./README (~line 50) <-- LGPL2.1 > > Looking at this it gives the impression the line 724 declaration in > ProcManager.pm is the error. > > > -- > - CPAN kentnl@cpan.org > - Gentoo Perl Maintainer kentnl@gentoo.org ( perl@gentoo.org )
So, it looks like the headers of all of the files read "2.1"; the reference to "version 2 or later" is in the main module POD. It also appears that the situation was the same in version 0.10 (released in 2000, the first version I can find on CPAN or BackPAN) as it is today. Since every file indicates 2.1 except one instance of "2 or later", and 2.1 *is* 2 or later, I believe that a rerelease removing the "2 or later" instance (making it clearly LGPL2.1 only) could be accomplished without involving existing copyright holders. Going the other way could be hairy, and finding anyone at First Data (FundsXpress's successor company) who cares might be difficult. Of course, doing that would pretty much foreclose the possibility of an LGPL3 derivative. The alternative would be to do nothing, classify this distribution as LGPL2 in *your* system, and leave the interpretation of whether LGPL-newer is allowed up to the lawyers in the event that someone actually wants to use it that way.
  Fri Aug 21 01:40:24 2020 The RT System itself - Status changed from 'new' to 'open'