Re: [pkg-boost-devel] Bug#349209: boost: Boost Graph Library is non-free and undistributable in compiled form

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [pkg-boost-devel] Bug#349209: boost: Boost Graph Library is non-free and undistributable in compiled form

Steve M. Robbins
Dear Boost Graph Library Developers,

The following is a reply to a bug report from a Debian user
[http://bugs.debian.org/349209] pointing out deficiencies in the
library licensing, from Debian's point of view.  We'd like to
know whether the few remaining files NOT available under the
Boost Software License may be relicensed.  Thanks.


On Sat, Jan 21, 2006 at 04:21:38PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:

> According to boost debian/copyright file, the
> Boost Graph library does not seem to comply with the DFSG.

That file is out of date.

Most of the current boost source files are licensed under the
Boost Software License [http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt]
which I believe is OK by DFSG.

I found the exceptions in the HEADER files using

    cd boost/graph
    find * -type f | xargs grep -L 'http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt'

Of the exceptions these 8 are under the original GRAPH license:

        adjacency_list_io.hpp          
        cuthill_mckee_ordering.hpp    
        detail/sparse_ordering.hpp       BLANKET
        king_ordering.hpp
        profile.hpp
        relax.hpp                        BLANKET
        sloan_ordering.hpp
        wavefront.hpp

The two marked BLANKET, however, are actually available under the
Boost Software License as all listed authors have granted

    permission to replace all existing licenses on their contributions
    to Boost with the Boost Software License, Version 1.0.

    [http://www.boost.org/more/blanket-permission.txt]


For the record here are the set of authors and whether they appear on
blanket-permission.txt:

Fran├žois Faure        NO
Andrew Lumsdaine      YES
Lie-Quan Lee          YES
Jeremy G. Siek        YES
Doug Gregor           YES
D. Kevin McGrath      NO
Marc Wintermantel     NO


Three more of the headers have MIT/BSD-like licenses which sound okay
to me.  They are as follows.

File detail/bitset.hpp is from SGI with the following license:

/*
 * Copyright (c) 1998
 * Silicon Graphics Computer Systems, Inc.
 *
 * Permission to use, copy, modify, distribute and sell this software
 * and its documentation for any purpose is hereby granted without fee,
 * provided that the above copyright notice appear in all copies and
 * that both that copyright notice and this permission notice appear
 * in supporting documentation.  Silicon Graphics makes no
 * representations about the suitability of this software for any
 * purpose.  It is provided "as is" without express or implied warranty.
 */


File isomorphism.hpp is under the following license:

// Copyright (C) 2001 Jeremy Siek, Douglas Gregor, Brian Osman
//
// Permission to copy, use, sell and distribute this software is granted
// provided this copyright notice appears in all copies.
// Permission to modify the code and to distribute modified code is granted
// provided this copyright notice appears in all copies, and a notice
// that the code was modified is included with the copyright notice.
//
// This software is provided "as is" without express or implied warranty,
// and with no claim as to its suitability for any purpose.


File property_iter_range.hpp is under the following license:

// (C) Copyright Fran├žois Faure, iMAGIS-GRAVIR / UJF, 2001. Permission
// to copy, use, modify, sell and distribute this software is granted
// provided this copyright notice appears in all copies. This software
// is provided "as is" without express or implied warranty, and with
// no claim as to its suitability for any purpose.


File simple_point.hpp has no copyright at all.  I presume this is
an oversight and invite the Boost Graph authors to comment.


> What is worse, it seems there's no permission to distribute
> the Boost Graph Library in compiled form.

The headers are only distributed as sources, so that should be OK,
even if annoying and possibly non-free (see below).

There is a small library that is compiled to libbgl-viz.  This library
has four source files, three of which are under Boost Software
License.  The exception is libs/graph/src/graphviz_lex.ll, which is
under the origian graph license.  On the other hand, the listed
author, Lie-Quan Lee has given blanket permission, so we may apply the
Boost Software License to it as well.



> | Any disputes arising out of this Agreement or LICENSEE'S use of the
> | software at any time shall be resolved by the courts of the state of
> | Indiana.  LICENSEE hereby consents to the jurisdiction of the Indiana
> | courts and waives the right to challenge the jurisdiction thereof in
> | any dispute arising out of this Agreement or Licensee's use of the
> | software.
>
> This is a choice of venue, which is considered non-free by many
> debian-legal regulars (including myself...).
> People who accept this license may be forced to travel to the state
> of Indiana, whenever the copyright holder decides to sue them (even
> for frivolous claims, even if they live on the other side of the
> ocean). This is a significant restriction on the exercise of the
> rights granted by the license.

This sounds like a serious problem.  I'd hate to have to remove part of
Boost from Debian.  To the graph authors: is it possible that the remaining
few files can be relicensed under BSL?

Thanks,
-Steve Robbins
(co-maintainer of Boost for Debian)

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

What goes in 3rd-party packages (was: [pkg-boost-devel] Bug#349209: boost: Boost Graph Library is non-free and undistributable in compiled form)

David Abrahams
"Steve M. Robbins" <[hidden email]> writes:

> Dear Boost Graph Library Developers,
>
> The following is a reply to a bug report from a Debian user
> [http://bugs.debian.org/349209] pointing out deficiencies in the
> library licensing, from Debian's point of view.  We'd like to
> know whether the few remaining files NOT available under the
> Boost Software License may be relicensed.  Thanks.

Steve,

I am going to be trying to write some new "getting started"
documentation for Boost for the upcoming release.  I would
really like to include some information about what people can expect
when they get Boost packages from their Debian, RedHat, whatever
distribution.  All of our documentation so far is written from the
perspective that users have a complete Boost CVS tree, but I guess
that's not true for everyone?  Can you fill us in?

Thanks,
Dave

--
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Bug#349209: [pkg-boost-devel] Bug#349209: boost: Boost Graph Library is non-free and undistributable in compiled form

Doug Gregor-2
In reply to this post by Steve M. Robbins
On Feb 5, 2006, at 10:58 AM, Steve M. Robbins wrote:

> Dear Boost Graph Library Developers,
>
> The following is a reply to a bug report from a Debian user
> [http://bugs.debian.org/349209] pointing out deficiencies in the
> library licensing, from Debian's point of view.  We'd like to
> know whether the few remaining files NOT available under the
> Boost Software License may be relicensed.  Thanks.

We're looking into it.

>
> On Sat, Jan 21, 2006 at 04:21:38PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
>
>> According to boost debian/copyright file, the
>> Boost Graph library does not seem to comply with the DFSG.
>
> That file is out of date.
>
> Most of the current boost source files are licensed under the
> Boost Software License [http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt]
> which I believe is OK by DFSG.
>
> I found the exceptions in the HEADER files using
>
>     cd boost/graph
>     find * -type f | xargs grep -L
> 'http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt'
>
> Of the exceptions these 8 are under the original GRAPH license:
>
> adjacency_list_io.hpp

I'll contact the author.

> cuthill_mckee_ordering.hpp
> detail/sparse_ordering.hpp       BLANKET
> king_ordering.hpp

Yes, these can all go under the Boost Software License.

> profile.hpp

I'll contact the author.

> relax.hpp                        BLANKET

Yes, this can go under the Boost Software License.

> sloan_ordering.hpp
> wavefront.hpp

I'll contact the authors.

> File simple_point.hpp has no copyright at all.  I presume this is
> an oversight and invite the Boost Graph authors to comment.

Yes, this was an oversight. It's copyright Trustees of Indiana
University, 2004-2005 under the Boost Software License. (It's fixed in
Boost CVS).

> There is a small library that is compiled to libbgl-viz.  This library
> has four source files, three of which are under Boost Software
> License.  The exception is libs/graph/src/graphviz_lex.ll, which is
> under the origian graph license.  On the other hand, the listed
> author, Lie-Quan Lee has given blanket permission, so we may apply the
> Boost Software License to it as well.

Yes, this can also go under the Boost Software License; fixed in Boost
CVS.

>> | Any disputes arising out of this Agreement or LICENSEE'S use of the
>> | software at any time shall be resolved by the courts of the state of
>> | Indiana.  LICENSEE hereby consents to the jurisdiction of the
>> Indiana
>> | courts and waives the right to challenge the jurisdiction thereof in
>> | any dispute arising out of this Agreement or Licensee's use of the
>> | software.
>>
>> This is a choice of venue, which is considered non-free by many
>> debian-legal regulars (including myself...).
>> People who accept this license may be forced to travel to the state
>> of Indiana, whenever the copyright holder decides to sue them (even
>> for frivolous claims, even if they live on the other side of the
>> ocean). This is a significant restriction on the exercise of the
>> rights granted by the license.
>
> This sounds like a serious problem.

That is rather scary :)

>   I'd hate to have to remove part of
> Boost from Debian.  To the graph authors: is it possible that the
> remaining
> few files can be relicensed under BSL?

For the files where I've said that I need to contact the author, we're
dealing with code that was contributed to us several years ago for
which we have not yet received permission to move to the Boost Software
License. It may take a couple days for me to track down these authors
to get their permission.

        Doug



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [pkg-boost-devel] Bug#349209: boost: Boost Graph Library is non-free and undistributable in compiled form

Doug Gregor
In reply to this post by Steve M. Robbins

On Feb 5, 2006, at 10:58 AM, Steve M. Robbins wrote:

> Dear Boost Graph Library Developers,
>
> The following is a reply to a bug report from a Debian user
> [http://bugs.debian.org/349209] pointing out deficiencies in the
> library licensing, from Debian's point of view.  We'd like to
> know whether the few remaining files NOT available under the
> Boost Software License may be relicensed.  Thanks.

The entirety of the Boost Graph Library is has now been relicensed  
under the Boost Software License. The updated licenses will appear in  
the next major Boost release (1.34.0), although they also apply to  
existing releases.

        Cheers,
        Doug Gregor
        Boost Graph Library Maintainer
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost