Re: [Libcdio-devel] Packaging libcdio 0.92 and libcdio-paranoia 10.2+0.90+1 for Debian

[Robert Kausch]

Had a look at libcdio again and realized it's GPL only.

In that case, I think we should go the other way and make 
libcdio-paranoia GPL only as well. It cannot be used without libcdio 
anyway so anything using it would have to be GPL anyway. The LGPL option 
for libcdio-paranoia does not really make sense in that case.

Robert

Am 25.09.2014 um 14:27 schrieb Robert Kausch:
> Hi Rocky,
>
> I had a look at the licenses of cdparanoia 10.2 and cdio-paranoia 
> source files.
>
> In cdparanoia, the only files that carry a GPL license are cachetest.c 
> and main.c (which would be cd-paranoia.c in cdio-paranoia). Everything 
> else, including the whole library, is LGPL licensed.
>
> In cdio-paranoia about half the files are GPL, the other half LGPL. I 
> think this is because the license of cdparanoia used to be the GPL 
> until svn revision 14871. In revision 14872, they changed the license 
> to LGPL, but that switch was never made in cdio-paranoia.
>
> As cdio-paranoia is now based on the latest cdparanoia release which, 
> except for the two files mentioned above, is LGPL licensed, we could 
> change the license to LGPL as well. Only the cd-paranoia tool would 
> still have to be GPL licensed.
>
> Tell me what you think.
>
> Robert
>
> Am 15.09.2014 um 13:43 schrieb Rocky Bernstein:
> > My intent was to make this identical to
> > http://downloads.xiph.org/releases/cdparanoia/cdparanoia-III-10.2.src.tgz 
> >
> > from https://www.xiph.org/paranoia/down.html
> >
> > I may have botched things though. If there are discrepancies, I'd
> > appreciate it if you or others would fix and make a pull request off 
> > of the
> > git repository https://github.com/rocky/libcdio-paranoia
> >
> > I see that doc/FAQ.txt isn't in the source mentioned above. So maybe we
> > remove that file?
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 5:56 AM, Nicolas Boullis <address@hidden>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Rocky,
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 08, 2014 at 05:17:26AM -0400, Rocky Bernstein wrote:
> > > > Lastly, the doc/FAQ.txt file has a copyright notice, with the "All
> > > > rights reserved." sentence. Isn't it non-free?
> > > Sorry for bothering you, but do you have an opinion on this one?
> > > I cannot start the Debian transition to libcdio 0.92 (or the upcoming
> > > 0.93) without packages for libcdio-paranoia, and I cannot ship a
> > > non-free documentation within Debian main.
> > > Do you have a reason to think this file is free? Or should I use a
> > > stripped-down tarball?
> > >
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > --
> > > Nicolas