On 6/12/18, mitchell wodach <mtwo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 6/12/18, Stuart Henderson <s...@spacehopper.org> wrote:
>> On 2018/06/12 21:26, mitchell wodach wrote:
>>> On 6/9/18, Marc Espie <es...@nerim.net> wrote:
>>> > On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 06:15:01PM -0500, mitchell wodach wrote:
>>> >> Hi
>>> >>
>>> >> I'm working on porting Freedink. I have the data separate form the
>>> >> game
>>> >> code.
>>> >> The data has multiple licenses. so for PERMIT_PACKAGE in Makefile I
>>> >> should
>>> >> pick the most restrictive license?
>>> >
>>> > What you're saying is highly ambiguous: do the individual data files
>>> > have
>>> > separate licences ? In that case, the most restrictive is appropriate.
>>> >
>>> > Or do you see several licences that apply to all files ? In that case,
>>> > this means the data can be redistributed under any of the licences. In
>>> > that
>>> > case, the least restrictive is appropriate.
>>> >
>>>
>>> I do apologize for the ambiguity of my question. not the greatest
>>> question asker.
>>> I took a look in the upstream source tarball for the data. the files
>>> do have their own separate licences. most of the data is licensed
>>> under zlib. The files that are not under the zlib license are
>>> specified in a separate readme file and have a folder with all the
>>> license texts. so the first case is the one I need to pick. I guess I
>>> have some reading todo lol!
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Mitch
>>>
>>
>> Got a link to the actual distfiles you're looking at?
>>
>>
> yes I do have a link
>
> https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/freedink/freedink-data-1.08.20170409.tar.gz
>
> The files I looked at are README.txt and README-REPLACEMENTS.txt and
> the directory with license texts in it is called licenses/
>
