Re: [GNU-linux-libre] Packages under the artistic license

[Karl Goetz]

On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 19:13:23 +0100
Rubén Rodríguez Pérez <address@hidden> wrote:

> 
> > Either way does someone have a volunteer whos got nothing to do?
> > someone to approach upstreams and ask them to dual licence under
> > _any_ free licence would be great.
> 
> The first step would be to make a better list. I just did a first
> look, so I've probably left packages behind. Also, some of the
> packages in the list are already dual licensed, but the packager
> listed them wrong.
> 
> As an example: bioperl.org front page says:
> "BioPerl is distributed under the Perl Artistic License. For more
> information, see _licensing_BioPerl_."
> But when you go to _licensing_BioPerl_, they say: "BioPerl is licensed
> under the same terms as Perl itself, which means it is dually-licensed
> under either the Artistic or GPL licenses."
> 
> The debian packager didn't go that deep, and I carried the mistake on.

It may have had a different licence at the time it was packaged too.
That looks like a bug in the debian/copyright (needs updating).
kk

-- 
Karl Goetz, (Kamping_Kaiser / VK5FOSS)
Debian contributor / gNewSense Maintainer
http://www.kgoetz.id.au
No, I won't join your social networking group

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature