On Sun, 13 Nov 2011 11:49:10 -0500 Adam C Powell IV wrote: > On Sun, 2011-11-13 at 15:20 +0100, Francesco Poli wrote: [...] > > Yes, but I think freecad should not be released in a stable version > > (again) with this serious issue unsolved. > > Indeed, a package with a copyright/licensing issue can't go into a > release, and can't go into testing. > > IMO this isn't an issue,
Please let me understand:
(0) you (still) don't think that the OCTPL is GPL-incompatible
or
(1) you agree that the OCTPL is GPL-incompatible, but you think that
this is not an issue for the package freecad linked with
libopencascade-*
Is it (0) or (1)?
> and the fact that Debian allowed it into
> unstable and the squeeze release indicates that the project probably
> doesn't think so either.
[...]
The issue may have been overlooked at first.
If I recall correctly, the initial discussions about the OCTPL were
mainly focused on its DFSG-freeness.
The GPL-incompatibility issue was only raised later and was not
immediately clear.
When I filed the bug report, the GPL-incompatibility had been
acknowledged by Open CASCADE S.A.S. itself (that is to say, the authors
of the OCTPL!).
>
> But until there's an official ruling on this issue, the package can't go
> any further in Debian.
An official ruling on the fact that a GPL'ed package which links with
both a GPL'ed library and a GPL-incompatible library has a serious bug?!?
I thought this was agreed upon long time ago within the Debian Project.
I have seen so many packages with such issues reported as serious bugs
(for instance for GPL programs linking with OpenSSL), that I think it
goes without saying!
--
http://www.inventati.org/frx/frx-gpg-key-transition-2010.txt
New GnuPG key, see the transition document!
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82 3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE
pgp0QmXuAaw73.pgp
Description: PGP signature
