plplot-devel

[Plplot-devel] Fwd: [Bug 1295175] New: plplot contain problematic content

[Orion P. <or...@co...>]

This does look like a problem, unless there is specific permission for 
this file?


-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: [Bug 1295175] New: plplot contain problematic content
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 2016 08:08:59 +0000
From: bug...@re...
To: or...@co...

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1295175

             Bug ID: 1295175
            Summary: plplot contain problematic content
            Product: Fedora
            Version: rawhide
          Component: plplot
           Assignee: or...@co...
           Reporter: kam...@y2...
         QA Contact: ext...@fe...
                 CC: or...@co...



Hello.

plplot included non-free image.
This is "Lena" (Lenna) image. (PGM and IMG file)

This file license (Copyright) is non-free, and this content is violate 
Fedora
Packaging Guideline.

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Code_Vs_Content

Thanks.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

Re: [Plplot-devel] Fwd: [Bug 1295175] New: plplot contain problematic content

[Alan W. I. <ir...@be...>]

On 2016-01-04 09:08-0000 Phil Rosenberg wrote:

> To add to my last email, I just googled for compatibility between CC
> and LGPL - most of the resources I found were actually regarding GPL,
> not LGPL, but apparently they are incompatible - I think mostly
> because CC requires attribution
> http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/272335/how-and-when-had-the-cc-by-license-become-gnu-gpl-compatible
>
> Anyway, I think if we use a CC image, we must specify that the image
> is not LGPL and is in fact CC.

example 20 is an LPGLed combined work (consisting of LGPL application
and LGPL library), the image that example 20 reads is simply a data file, It seems
to me that any licensed software could read data that is licensed in
any way since software and some arbitrary datafile it reads are not a combined
work. For example, the GVPL'd gv application displays PostScript files
regardless of their license, free software browsers display web
content regardless of that content's license, etc., etc.

So my assumption is the discussion you referred to was considering the
possibility of combining software licensed under the GPL or LGPL with
_other software_ licensed under the CC license.  But that is a very
different situation than software reading a simple data file.

Assuming that legal theory is correct, then the only question for the
data file is do we have the right to distribute it in modified (PPM,
gray-scale) form?  And the CC license for the data file gives us that
right assuming we note the licensing terms for that image file in our
Copyright file.

Alan

__________________________
Alan W. Irwin

Astronomical research affiliation with Department of Physics and Astronomy,
University of Victoria (astrowww.phys.uvic.ca).

Programming affiliations with the FreeEOS equation-of-state
implementation for stellar interiors (freeeos.sf.net); the Time
Ephemerides project (timeephem.sf.net); PLplot scientific plotting
software package (plplot.sf.net); the libLASi project
(unifont.org/lasi); the Loads of Linux Links project (loll.sf.net);
and the Linux Brochure Project (lbproject.sf.net).
__________________________

Linux-powered Science
__________________________

Re: [Plplot-devel] Fwd: [Bug 1295175] New: plplot contain problematic content

[Phil R. <p.d...@gm...>]

> Assuming that legal theory is correct, then the only question for the
> data file is do we have the right to distribute it in modified (PPM,
> gray-scale) form?  And the CC license for the data file gives us that
> right assuming we note the licensing terms for that image file in our
> Copyright file.

Agreed. In fact I realised afterwards that the map example uses data
files that are freely distributable, but not GPL. I just checked and
these are actually not mentioned in our Copyright file, so I am about
to edit that so they are noted.

Re: [Plplot-devel] Fwd: [Bug 1295175] New: plplot contain problematic content

[Phil R. <p.d...@gm...>]

Sorry I appear to be filling this conversation with chaff. Can anyone
enlighten me as to the (intended) meaning of this statement in our
Copyright file

Any file that has a explicit copyright notice may be distributed under
the terms of both the LGPL and whatever stated conditions accompany the
copyright.

I have a feeling that this no longer applies and needs removing,
perhaps it did apply when (if?) plplot only contained files that
plplot contributors had written.

Phil

Re: [Plplot-devel] Fwd: [Bug 1295175] New: plplot contain problematic content

[Alan W. I. <ir...@be...>]

On 2016-01-04 13:26-0000 Phil Rosenberg wrote:

> Sorry I appear to be filling this conversation with chaff. Can anyone
> enlighten me as to the (intended) meaning of this statement in our
> Copyright file
>
> Any file that has a explicit copyright notice may be distributed under
> the terms of both the LGPL and whatever stated conditions accompany the
> copyright.
>
> I have a feeling that this no longer applies and needs removing,
> perhaps it did apply when (if?) plplot only contained files that
> plplot contributors had written.

I have no idea why that phrase was included.  I think it is best that
you remove it.

Alan

__________________________
Alan W. Irwin

Astronomical research affiliation with Department of Physics and Astronomy,
University of Victoria (astrowww.phys.uvic.ca).

Programming affiliations with the FreeEOS equation-of-state
implementation for stellar interiors (freeeos.sf.net); the Time
Ephemerides project (timeephem.sf.net); PLplot scientific plotting
software package (plplot.sf.net); the libLASi project
(unifont.org/lasi); the Loads of Linux Links project (loll.sf.net);
and the Linux Brochure Project (lbproject.sf.net).
__________________________

Linux-powered Science
__________________________