On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 10:50:51PM +0100, Morten Linderud wrote: > I've now posted the REUSE RFC and slightly updated the proposed amendment to > RFC40. > > RFC: https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/rfcs/-/merge_requests/52 > > Proposed amendment of RFC40: > https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/rfcs/-/merge_requests/49 > > It would be nice to clarify the situation as we are approaching the 3 month > deadline for the licensing of our package sources. > > Jelle has also brought up another aspect we haven't considered in the original > RFC. Debian apparently license patches *and* some auxillary files (think > tmpfiles.d or sysusers.d) under the license of the upstream sources. This > would > allow us to upstream additional files to the relevant upstream if needed > without > having to seek relicensing of the files from the original author. > > While we have patches mentioned in RFC40, and properly licensed under the > proposed RFC52, we haven't really considered the additional files. Some > thoughts > there would be nice.
I've chatted with jelle, anthraxx, raff, sven and so on and landed on that we are not going to license our patches nor auxiliary files under the upstream license. We will just license this under the 0-Clause BSD license as it demands nothing of the upstream taking the files. 0BSD should allow upstreams to take any files we produce, and they can relicense it freely under their chosen license. This is sort of a "hack", but is also the original intention of why we chose this license. I've added a sentence to the amendment to clarify this, and intend to merge this before the weekend unless there are any other comments. https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/rfcs/-/merge_requests/49 Then I'll fix up the REUSE RFC. -- Morten Linderud PGP: 9C02FF419FECBE16
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
