Follow-up Comment #6, task #16666 (group administration):
> Now, do you understand what 'valid copyright notice' means? I thought it meant to write "Copyright" with the year and name, and the license. But now I'm not sure. What does it mean? > Some files may be under GPLv2-or-later, but I think I've found a few files > under GPLv2-only; so it looks like the combination is under GPLv2-only. > Would you like to check that? Checking [https://sourceware.org/git/?p=valgrind.git;a=summary the git repository] I found a mix of licenses, including LGPL and BSD: The [https://sourceware.org/git/?p=valgrind.git;a=blob;f=COPYING;h=d159169d1050894d3ea3b98e1c965c4058208fe1;hb=HEAD COPYING] file is the GPLv2. I found [https://sourceware.org/git/?p=valgrind.git;a=blob;f=helgrind/tests/tc17_sembar.c;h=ee40160b082d899cb3469d21e385903132ff44f1;hb=HEAD helgrind/tests/tc17_sembar.c] that is LGPLv2.1-or-later. Also I found [https://sourceware.org/git/?p=valgrind.git;a=blob;f=mpi/libmpiwrap.c;h=2fa1cb8fe0b0daf469376747b59d3c7d4bf3b4fa;hb=HEAD mpi/libmpiwrap.c] that has a BSD-4-clauses license and says "Notice that the following BSD-style license applies to this one file only, The rest of Valgrind is licensed under the terms of the GNU General Public License, version 2, unless otherwise indicated." I couldn't find which files are GPLv2-only. In any case, I don't have the required knowledge to know the license of valgrind as a whole. This mix of BSD, LGPL, and GPL is beyond my understanding of copyright. It didn't come to my mind that a software can have different files with different licenses. It makes sense, but I hadn't think about it before. I might conclude that it is GPLv2-only because: The website says "Valgrind is Open Source / Free Software, and is freely available under the GNU General Public License, version 2." And because in the mix of licenses I might guess that the GPLv2-only is the only license compatible with all other options (GPLv2-or-later, LGPL and BSD). I mean, I can't say it is GPLv2-or-later because you found files that are GPLv2-only. And it can't be LGPL nor BSD because following the LGPL or BSD license is incompatible with GPLv2, but following GPLv2 is compatible with both. But I don't know. What do you think? What happens in this case? Best regards. _______________________________________________________ Reply to this item at: <https://savannah.nongnu.org/task/?16666> _______________________________________________ Message sent via Savannah https://savannah.nongnu.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
