[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Question about multiple licenses
From: |
Arun Isaac |
Subject: |
Re: Question about multiple licenses |
Date: |
Sun, 03 Sep 2017 17:15:23 +0530 |
Dave Love writes:
> Alex Vong <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Based on the above general argument, I think we should list all the
>> licenses instead of just GPLv2+ since it would be inaccurate to say that
>> the whole program is under just GPLv2+.
>
> Indeed. Not only do you need to list the licences (according to all
> "legal advice" I've seen for distributions), but normally also
> distribute the relevant licence texts, even for permissive licences if
> they require that (e.g. BSD). I raised this recently, as it's not
> generally being done, so some Guix binary packages appear to be
> copyright-infringing.
I pushed linkchecker with all the licenses listed. So, I guess we've
done the right thing with respect to this package.