From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arun Isaac Subject: Re: Question about multiple licenses Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2017 17:15:23 +0530 Message-ID: References: <681c721c.AEQAPExWoDUAAAAAAAAAAAOtZhgAAAACwQwAAAAAAAW9WABZoSX-@mailjet.com> <87mv6kj7i7.fsf@gmail.com> <873786zlsb.fsf@albion.it.manchester.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59161) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1doTM3-0000yB-H9 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 03 Sep 2017 07:46:24 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1doTLz-0004Ak-0g for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 03 Sep 2017 07:46:19 -0400 Received: from o164.p8.mailjet.com ([87.253.233.164]:60065) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1doTLy-00048j-Ni for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 03 Sep 2017 07:46:14 -0400 In-reply-to: <873786zlsb.fsf@albion.it.manchester.ac.uk> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: guix-devel@gnu.org Dave Love writes: > Alex Vong writes: > >> Based on the above general argument, I think we should list all the >> licenses instead of just GPLv2+ since it would be inaccurate to say that >> the whole program is under just GPLv2+. > > Indeed. Not only do you need to list the licences (according to all > "legal advice" I've seen for distributions), but normally also > distribute the relevant licence texts, even for permissive licences if > they require that (e.g. BSD). I raised this recently, as it's not > generally being done, so some Guix binary packages appear to be > copyright-infringing. I pushed linkchecker with all the licenses listed. So, I guess we've done the right thing with respect to this package. =