[rt.cpan.org #117955] LICENSE does not agree with lib/Module/ScanDeps.pm

"Jitka Plesnikova via RT" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.lang.perl.par
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Tue Sep 20 03:20:00 2016: Request 117955 was acted upon.
Transaction: Correspondence added by jplesnik
       Queue: Module-ScanDeps
     Subject: LICENSE does not agree with lib/Module/ScanDeps.pm
   Broken in: 1.22
    Severity: (no value)
       Owner: Nobody
  Requestors: [email protected]
      Status: open
 Ticket <URL: https://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=117955 >


On Mon Sep 19 08:23:27 2016, RSCHUPP wrote:
> Am 2016-09-19 05:55:44, jplesnik schrieb:
> > Module-ScanDeps-1.22 has weird license declaration. While LICENSE
> > file
> > quotes Artistic 2.0 license, lib/Module/ScanDeps.pm  (and other
> > module) files declares "same terms as Perl itself" and that means
> > GPL+
> > or Artistic 1 (see http://dev.perl.org/licenses/).
> >
> > The current wordings implies that lib/Module/ScanDeps.pm (and other
> > module) files are covered by GPL+ or Artistic 1 licenses and the
> > other
> > files like wip/scan_dlls.pl are covered by Artistic 2.0 license.
> >
> > Is that really what the author wants?
> 
> Who knows? I'm just the maintainer, not the original author.
> There was no separate LICENSE file until I moved Module::ScanDeps, PAR
> and PAR::Packer to GitHub. I agree that I picked the wrong LICENSE
> with
> the current "Artistic 2.0".
> What do you think about something like
> 
> https://github.com/libwww-perl/libwww-perl/blob/master/LICENSE
This license file is ok. 

> (without "This software is copyright (c) 1995 by Gisle Aas.",
> obviously).
> 
> Note that the wording
> 
> This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> it
> under the same terms as Perl itself.
> 
> See L<http://www.perl.com/perl/misc/Artistic.html>

The link should be replace by http://dev.perl.org/licenses/ to reference the license correctly. 


> in the source (and original README) is already ambiguous, as the given
>  link (nowadays) points to "Artistic 1.0", NOT to Larry Wall's
> original statement (as given in http://dev.perl.org/licenses/).
> 
> Cheers, Roderich
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.