Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] checklicenses.py
Date Index · Thread Index · Other Months · All Mailing Lists
Date Prev · Date Next · Thread Prev · Thread Next
From: João Valverde <joao.valverde@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2016 20:38:53 +0100


On 08/08/2016 08:12 PM, João Valverde wrote:



On 08/08/2016 07:38 PM, Guy Harris wrote:



On Aug 8, 2016, at 11:00 AM, João Valverde
<joao.valverde@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



On 08/08/2016 06:42 PM, Guy Harris wrote:

On Aug 8, 2016, at 9:00 AM, João Valverde
<joao.valverde@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


Is there some reason not to treat "you can license this under the
BSD license or under the GPL" as an acceptable license?


Please review https://code.wireshark.org/review/#/c/16957/.


That's still special-casing the dual-licensed files; any reason not
to just treat it as an acceptable license by adding "BSD (3 clause)
GPL (v2)" to WHITELISTED_LICENSES?


Repeating what I said in the Gerrit change (this is just my
understanding of course):

There's a difference between "choose license A or B" and "this code
is license A and that addition is license B".


Then perhaps licensecheck.pl should distinguish between them:


[ snipped code sample]

Perhaps... I think that distinction only matters to the copyright
holder, CACE Technologies, now Riverbed I believe.

For the distributor, the Wireshark project, the code is licensed under
BSD, because it cannot be used with GPLv2+.
I meant to say cannot be used with GPLv2+ *otherwise*. More accurately that accepting GPLv2 only code would mean we can't use GPLv3(+). 

Sorry for the confusion.