[Pkg-firebird-general] Request for comments for ibwebadmin package

[Remco Seesink]

> 1. Why do *you* add the exception that permits for linking w/ some
> GPL-incompatible program
> a) in a debian-specific diff?  The exception has to be granted by
> upstream and they have to release a version that has this exception.
> You must not add it yourself!

The license is from the 0.98 version. 0.98 had some problems which is why I
reverted to 0.97 until I can sort them out. I did change a tiny thing on
the 0.98 license. It should be the upstream author of ibwebadmin and not
the upstream author of JSRS to make the linking exception. I already
contacted upstream ibwebadmin about it and it will be in the next release.

> b) at the top of LICENSE file, which is otherwise pure GPL? This
> exception seems to fit more into a file that would be called i.e.
> COPYING, where the copying informations would be held and which
> would contain the "exception" and reference to the pure GPL in LICENSE
> file.

My understanding was that the exception was a part of the legal agreement
regarding the copyright. In other words, a license. This is were I advised
upstream to put it. Maybe I was mistaken?

> I saw you already contacted upstream about it, but *they* should release
> a version that contains the new COPYING rules.

They will. If it is a problem I'll wait for it before asking for an upload
to unstable. I thought it was ok to proceed at least to mentors.debian.net
to request comments.
 
> 2. I don't like the "No Nonsense Copyright and License for JSRS
> JavaScript Remote Scripting".  It seems that debian-legal didn't like
> it either.  Again you should try to contact upstream and explain
> the problem.  Dual licensing w/ GPL (or LGPL) would be an option that
> would also eliminate all problems mentioned in 1) by eliminating the
> need for an exception.

Upstream JSRS prefered to keep his license and go for the linking exception.
Debian-legal asserted that that was a solution. See:

http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/05/msg00799.html

and the surrounding thread. They think it is DFSG free and an linking exception
would solve the incompatibility.

Cheers,
Remco.