After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 619891 - Probably minor license issue with vte
Probably minor license issue with vte
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: vte
Classification: Core
Component: general
unspecified
Other All
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: VTE Maintainers
VTE Maintainers
[fixed-next][fixed-0-36][commit:5cf31...
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2010-05-28 00:52 UTC by Brian Cameron
Modified: 2014-04-11 17:55 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---

Attachments
LGPL 2.1, new address (136.91 KB, patch)
2014-01-05 21:29 UTC, Egmont Koblinger 		committed Details | Review

Description Brian Cameron 2010-05-28 00:52:41 UTC 
The COPYING file says LGPLv2.  However, the file src/vteversion.h has a header with a LGPLv2.1 license.  Doesn't this mean that the whole library is under LGPLv2.1 and the COPYING file should be updated?  Or perhaps src/vteversion.h could be relicensed under the license used by the rest of the library?
Comment 1 Christian Persch 2010-05-28 18:06:55 UTC 
LGPL2 and LGPL2.1 are the same except for the renaming from Libary to Lesser.

I think we'd accept a patch that just changes all files from LGPL2+ to 2.1+.
Comment 2 Egmont Koblinger 2014-01-05 21:22:00 UTC 
*** Bug 721522 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 3 Egmont Koblinger 2014-01-05 21:29:07 UTC 
Created attachment 265396 [details] [review]
LGPL 2.1, new address

The patch

- updates LGPL 2 to 2.1 everywhere

- keeps GPL 2 for test-vte-sh.sh, and GPL 3 for vte.sh and acinclude.m4

- updates to the exact text of these licenses, including formatting (of the plain text version) as found on fsf homepage.

I did it manually (copy-pasting), please double check that I did not accidentally change the actual license of any of the files.
Comment 4 Egmont Koblinger 2014-01-05 21:40:03 UTC 
The "You should have received" bits in test-vte-sh.sh and vte.sh suggest that we'd need to include the full text of GPL 2 and 3 in the tarball. Not that I care too much about it :)
Comment 5 Egmont Koblinger 2014-01-08 22:57:00 UTC 
Fixed on vte-0-36.

The ticket is marked as [fixed-next], apparently the license in that branch is GPL 3, not LGPL. Is this intentional?