* Mark Weyer <we...@informatik.hu-berlin.de> [2009-01-19 11:22:44 CET]: > Long version: > Some years ago I was part of a group who wrote new models for xblast. > If I recall correctly, we put all our povray code under the GPL.
From what I remember when I added those shapes I was told that they are under the GPL indeed, otherwise I wouldn't have added them. > At least I am sure that either I put my own code under the GPL, or, if > I was lazy, I did not license it at all (which would make the model > completely undistributable). (To simplify things, I hereby license all > all the model code I authored under the GPLv2.) That might become a problem, xblast iteself is GPL (without version meaning any version) if it's wanted to switch to GPLv3 (or even later) if you say GPLv2 explict. See above, xblast ever was under GPL without version restriction and you originally said yourself that it was put under the GPL (no version restriction). > Unfortunately, I have lost access to the computer pool in which we did > the developement, so in particular I cannot provide the sources any > more. Bernhard R. Link (DD) might still have access. I am uncertain where to find the sources myself, too. I was quite confident that I have stored them on some of my systems at some point, I will have to dig them up. In case I'm not able to find them this means that the shapes will have to go down the gutter and get stripped from the package, how unfortunate that might be. :/ > The models authored by me are: > golem > insect > sticky > tutorial > For these I am certain that the current package constitutes a GPL > violation. Thanks for listing them, I plan to strip them from the package within a week if we aren't able to come up with the sources. > Some models which I recall others of us to have developed: > felix > wuschel > wusel > For these I do not know, under which licenses they are today. Hence I > recommend a license audit for them. It would be helpful if you have some contact informations on who these "others of us" might be so they can be queried, otherwise those will to have get stripped, too. > In the developement, we shared some include files and build scripts. > Probably, some but not all of these are also by me. Thanks for the heads up, and sorry for the mess. Maybe it's easier to remove the packages all together. They don't seem to attract too many people these days anyway and given that you seem to be ready to bring it up as GPL violation but don't have the sources neither nor the contact informations for the "others of us" I don't see a too big chance to solve that in a timely manner, especially at this stage of the release cycle. Thanks anyway. Rhonda -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
