Re: [xml] [libxslt] GPL-licensed file being distributed with MIT-licensed libxslt

On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 04:53:08PM +0800, Daniel Veillard wrote:
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 11:11:53PM +0200, Nick Wellnhofer wrote:
On 16/09/2015 22:51, Mike Dalessio wrote:
It appears as though the file


is GPL licensed.

This file is being distributed in the libxslt source tarball, which is at odds
with libxslt's MIT license.

The same goes for doc/tutorial/libxslt_tutorial.c which libxslt_pipes.c
claims to be based on. Both files are based on the MIT-licensed xsltproc.c
but there's nothing wrong with that.

Any thoughts on what, if anything, should be done about it?

It's only part of the documentation, so I don't see a problem.

  Simplest is to find and ask the authors if they are fine relicencing
those, hopefully they see no problem and I will fix this, I tried to contact
them, let's see how it goes,

  So I reached to John Fleck and he's fine with this

as well as Panos

: Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 13:43:45 +0300
: From: Panos Louridas <louridas gmail com>
: To: veillard redhat com
: Subject: Re: Licence of example in libxslt
: Hi Daniel,
: Yes, sure, no problem. What do you need from me to do this?
: Cheers,
: Panos.

  So I think we can remove the GPL header making the inherited MIT licence
kick in:

 so tell me how many hours of lawyer time were wasted on this issue ;-) ?

Daniel Veillard      | Open Source and Standards, Red Hat
veillard redhat com  | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit | virtualization library

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]