GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 410387
gimp-data-extras-2.0.1 doesn't specify its license
Last modified: 2007-11-14 13:36:58 UTC
SSIA, the COPYING file is empty (both in the tarball as in SVN trunk). This is a bit bad because as it is, we don't know under what terms the package can be distributed. This came up in the Fedora Merge Review of the package, see: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225797
Perhaps it's best not to distribute the package then. I am afraid that we can't shed much light on this either. The origin of some of the data files is not clear. In my opinion installing the package doesn't do much good anyway.
Usefulness of individual patterns aside, what about the files where origin is clear? I'd ask people by myself and rip out unclear stuff in the repository, but somebody would have to check that into the repository and build/push the tarball.
As far as the material I contributed, it can be considered public domain, or GPL if it makes it easier. I don't recall there being anything "nonfree" in those packages when they were created. A lot of that material was included in the main gimp tree at some point, and later split out. Mainly just for package size issues.
also, I'm pretty sure all the s&p brushes were included with the original gimp 0.99.x tarballs, so presumably are gpl. I'd say remove the "found" art just to be safe. reach.gbr point.gbr punch.gbr bullethole.gbr
OK, I have checked this into trunk then: 2007-05-07 Sven Neumann <sven@gimp.org> * COPYING: GNU General Public License version 2. Fixes bug #410387. * brushes/Makefile.am * brushes/punch.gbr * brushes/reach.gbr * brushes/point.gbr * brushes/bullethole.gbr: removed "found" art as their license is unclear. We should probably do a release together with GIMP 2.4 then.
I guess now is the time to ask for wrapping this up and bundling a new tarball. Would you do that please? Thanks.
gimp-data-extras 2.0.2 is now available from ftp://ftp.gimp.org/pub/gimp/extras/
Thanks!