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

[Rocky Bernstein]

With Robert's last set of changes to libcdio and libcdio-paranoia I have
put out new tarballs at http://bashdb.sf.net/libcdio-0.93git.tar.gz and
http://bashdb.sf.net/libcdio-paranoia-10.2+0.93+1git.tar.gz

There are no functional changes.

On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 5:23 AM, Robert Kausch <address@hidden>
wrote:

>
>  I mention this because this is why libcdio-paranoia and libcdio were split
>> in the first place: we couldn't mix GPL 3 or later with GPL 2 only or
>> LGPL.
>>
>
> Dug a bit deeper; the problem at that time was mixing GPL 3 or later with
> GPL 2 only. libcdio included cdparanoia 9.8 code which was released as GPL
> 2 only, so when libcdio changed to GPL 3 or later, there was a problem. The
> licenses are not compatible, so the split was necessary at that point.
>
> Later, libcdio-paranoia upgraded to cdparanoia 10.0 and then 10.2 which
> changed the license to LGPL 2.1 only for the library and GPL 2 or later for
> the tool. Both allow distributing derivative works under the GPL 3 or
> later, so there's no problem anymore.
>
> Am 26.09.2014 um 08:10 schrieb Rocky Bernstein:
>
>>   I updated the libcdio-paranoia license to GPLv3 to match libcdio.
>>>
>> I am not sure we can do this.
>>
>>   GPLv2 I think means GPLv2 and *only* GPLv2. LGPL of Paranoia 10.2 allows
>>   LGPL 2.1 or later but I don't think GPL.
>>
>> I mention this because this is why libcdio-paranoia and libcdio were split
>> in the first place: we couldn't mix GPL 3 or later with GPL 2 only or
>> LGPL.
>>
>> I am sorry for the confusion and apologize that I wasn't clear about the
>> history of this before.
>>
>> Although I don't care to spend time thinking much about this, there are
>> lots of other people inside and outside the project that do.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 6:32 PM, Robert Kausch <address@hidden>
>> wrote:
>>
>>  I updated the libcdio-paranoia license to GPLv3 to match libcdio. Also
>>> updated two files in the libcdio tree that were still GPLv2.
>>>
>>> @Nicolas: Please have a look at the sources at https://github.com/rocky/
>>> libcdio-paranoia. Everything should be consistent now.
>>>
>>> Am 25.09.2014 um 15:09 schrieb Rocky Bernstein:
>>>
>>>   Ok. Would you and Nicolas make the changes as appropriate? I'll hold
>>> off
>>>
>>>> on
>>>> a release after you both go over this. Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 8:35 AM, Robert Kausch <address@hidden
>>>> >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>   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
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>
>
>