Licensing makes it hard to include in distributions #19

Closed
stapelberg opened this Issue Jun 20, 2012 · 5 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@stapelberg
Contributor

stapelberg commented Jun 20, 2012

Hey,

I’d like to package dunst for Debian so that people don’t have to follow a strange tutorial and can enjoy apt-get install dunst instead.

However, your licensing is a bit problematic :-/. As you might know, beerware is not exactly a license which Debian considers free. Would it be an option for you to provide a clear LICENSE file and use one of the licenses which are already present in your code? For example MIT/X11 from dmenu, or the BSD license from inih.

That’d be great!
Thanks,
Best regards,
Michael

@knopwob

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@knopwob

knopwob Jun 20, 2012

Owner

Hi,

a debian package would be great.

My knowledge about licenses and their implications is pretty low, so I don't know if I can just choose one license when there's code under another license as well. If you already know (or have a link handy) whether and how I can do that and what I have to do in order to proper document the license that would be great and make things faster.

edit: with the latest changes I pushed shortly before you wrote, the tutorial isn't necessary anymore. But that doens't change the fact, that I would love to see a debian package :-)

Owner

knopwob commented Jun 20, 2012

Hi,

a debian package would be great.

My knowledge about licenses and their implications is pretty low, so I don't know if I can just choose one license when there's code under another license as well. If you already know (or have a link handy) whether and how I can do that and what I have to do in order to proper document the license that would be great and make things faster.

edit: with the latest changes I pushed shortly before you wrote, the tutorial isn't necessary anymore. But that doens't change the fact, that I would love to see a debian package :-)

@stapelberg

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@stapelberg

stapelberg Jun 20, 2012

Contributor

Thanks for your reply.

Since you are the code author, you can chose the license you want to distribute it under.

One accepted way to go is to place a copyright notice in your (!) files, looking like this:

/* copyright 2012 Sascha Kruse and contributors (see LICENSE for licensing information) */

In the file LICENSE you then state:

All files (unless otherwise noted) are licensed under the BSD license:

followed by the text of the BSD license, you can find it at http://code.stapelberg.de/git/i3/tree/LICENSE for example.

It’d make things even more clear if you add a similar notice to other files which are licensed differently (like files you took from dmenu).

Feel free to ask if you still got any questions about this.

Contributor

stapelberg commented Jun 20, 2012

Thanks for your reply.

Since you are the code author, you can chose the license you want to distribute it under.

One accepted way to go is to place a copyright notice in your (!) files, looking like this:

/* copyright 2012 Sascha Kruse and contributors (see LICENSE for licensing information) */

In the file LICENSE you then state:

All files (unless otherwise noted) are licensed under the BSD license:

followed by the text of the BSD license, you can find it at http://code.stapelberg.de/git/i3/tree/LICENSE for example.

It’d make things even more clear if you add a similar notice to other files which are licensed differently (like files you took from dmenu).

Feel free to ask if you still got any questions about this.

@knopwob

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@knopwob

knopwob Jun 20, 2012

Owner

could you please take a look at the "license" branch? I'll merge it into master if everything looks fine.

Thank you.

Owner

knopwob commented Jun 20, 2012

could you please take a look at the "license" branch? I'll merge it into master if everything looks fine.

Thank you.

@stapelberg

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@stapelberg

stapelberg Jun 21, 2012

Contributor

Looks good to me! Thanks.

Contributor

stapelberg commented Jun 21, 2012

Looks good to me! Thanks.

@knopwob

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@knopwob

knopwob Jun 21, 2012

Owner

Merged into master, thank you.

Feel free to open new issues, if there are other things that I can do to make your life as a packager easier.

Owner

knopwob commented Jun 21, 2012

Merged into master, thank you.

Feel free to open new issues, if there are other things that I can do to make your life as a packager easier.

@knopwob knopwob closed this Jun 21, 2012

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment