[Savannah-register-public] [task #10756] Submission of LamaCMS

[Alex Fernandez]

Follow-up Comment #4, task #10756 (project administration):

Hi again,

Thanks for your effort. As to the website, as long as you are willing to
switch it over to Savannah it's fine.

There are only two issues left:

* The license for items in lamacms/modules/posts/wyzzicons/ and
lamacms/modules/posts/wyzzstyles/ is still not clear. The latter contains a
couple of CSS files, with no copyright header; the former a lot of images with
a license.txt file that talks about libpng. I assume they might be part of
WYZZ (in lamacms/modules/posts/wysiwyg.js), but guessing is not enough in
legal matters. We would need a statement somewhere clarifying the situation
for all these files, something like: "wysiwyg.js, all PNG files in wyzzicons/
and all CSS files in wyzzstyles/ are Copyright [year] [author], and are
published under the GPL 2.1 or later", for instance in a readme file in
lamacms/modules/posts/.

* The copyright header that you include does not make it clear which version
of the GPL you are using for your code. The original text contains in the GPL
howto <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-howto.html> has an additional bit which
you have omitted (in _italics_):

This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify it under
the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software
Foundation, _either version 3 of the License, or (at your option) any later
version_.

The license.txt you include is the GPL version 2, and here in Savannah you
have chosen "GPL version 2 or later", but the license is not clear looking at
any single file. Here the better solution would be to modify all headers to
contain the original bit but referring to version 2: _either version 2 of the
License, or (at your option) any later version_. If this is too much work you
might just say that in the readme.txt, but keep in mind that you make code
reuse much harder for downstream redistributors and users -- sometimes people
just want to mix and match modules, but still they want to know clearly which
license applies to which file.

We are much closer to approval now. Thanks again!

    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <http://savannah.gnu.org/task/?10756>

_______________________________________________
  Message sent via/by Savannah
  http://savannah.gnu.org/