Re: [GNU-linux-libre] Violations of GPL in GuixSD packaging design

[Jean Louis]

On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 02:03:02PM -0400, Joshua Gay wrote:
> > - the other matter has to be observed that the License itself was not
> >   delivered with the substitutes (object or executable form) of the
> >   packages I have tried, and I have already searched for License in some
> >   of them, such as in aria2, wicd, pulseaudio...
> 
> I believe that the license is in the source and the source is being
> provided from the same place (gnu.org) as the binary (which is also
> hosted on gnu.org), but, it could be that doing this in a way that makes
> it easier for downstream recipients to pass along binaries might be
> sensible.

The licenses are in the source usually, as their authors place them in
the source.

The point above, is the point of distributing object or executable form
of the program under the section 3. of GPL (2), where it says, that such
distribution shall include the copy of the License.

In my opinion, if that is a package like *.tar.xz, that can be
downloaded from single link, WITHIN that package shall be the copy of
the License.

Providing license in the source, on other separate URL, is
understandable, but distributing source refers to Section 1. or 2. and
not to Section 3.

Section 1. is copy and distribution of verbatim copies of source
code. Copy of license must be included. That is distribution of source
code from GuixSD servers, and that is automatically complied with, as
Ludovic pointed me how to get the sources. It is automatic because
authors have placed licenses in the packages. This refers to GuixSD
packages that are distributed without modifications.

Section 2. is distribution of modified GuixSD packages as the source
code, basically those that are patched. The problem is: " You must cause
the modified files to carry prominent notices stating that you changed
the files and the date of any change. ", while the problem of the copy
of the License in such package is automatically solved, as patched,
modified source code is distributed from Hydra servers

Section 3. is the distribution of object or executable form. That is
when user makes a command: guix package -i wicd, to install wicd
package, but such wicd package does not contain the copy of the
License.

Section 3 says:  "You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work
based on it, under Section 2) in object code or executable form under
the terms of Sections 1 and 2..."

whereby "under the terms of Section 1" it means: "and give any other
recipients of the Program a copy of this License along with the Program"

The GPL 2 license is here:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.html

When license is missing in the substitute package, which is object or
executable form under Section 3. the distribution is violating GPL2 for
each such package and is not teaching people about free software in
accordance with "Free System Distribution Guidelines".

All my remarks are absolutely not meant to be hostile, but just
opposite, remarks are there that possibly someone thinks how to solve
it and how to improve it. If I don't want GuixSD improved, I would not
write anything.

Jean Louis