Git Branch to clean up zlib licensing issues.
Volker.Lendecke at SerNet.DE
Wed Jul 16 07:02:24 MDT 2014
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 08:50:39AM -0400, Ira Cooper wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 8:46 AM, Volker Lendecke <Volker.Lendecke at sernet.de>
> > On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 08:39:39AM -0400, Ira Cooper wrote:
> > > For us in this case: It is noise.
> > >
> > > In general, shipping derived files, is an easy way to end up in GPL
> > > violation. If you have derived files you can't regenerate from their
> > > sources, that is a violation, though
> > >
> > > As the original authors, and distributors, they are NOT in violation. We
> > > could be.
> > Ok. So we did not sufficiently make clear that lib/zlib is
> > not covered by the GPL as the rest of Samba is?
> Could well be? It is more that people see a package as under one license.
> I'm personally not worried by it. But I don't want anyone to take what I
> say as legal advice, or Red Hat's legal advice to be clear.
> I'm merely saying I'd like these 4 no op files removed from our tree.
Ok. I don't understand yet the reasoning how we or our users
could end up violating the GPL by us shipping those files,
but there must be a deeper reason that is not obvious to
people without a PhD in legal matters.
As it does not hurt at all:
Reviewed-by: Volker Lendecke <vl at samba.org>
SerNet GmbH, Bahnhofsallee 1b, 37081 Göttingen
phone: +49-551-370000-0, fax: +49-551-370000-9
AG Göttingen, HRB 2816, GF: Dr. Johannes Loxen
http://www.sernet.de, mailto:kontakt at sernet.de
More information about the samba-technical