Closed (fixed)
Project:
Drupal core
Version:
5.x-dev
Component:
base system
Priority:
Normal
Category:
Bug report
Assigned:
Unassigned
Reporter:
Created:
30 Apr 2006 at 18:40 UTC
Updated:
28 Jan 2009 at 06:00 UTC
Jump to comment: Most recent file
Comments
Comment #1
rkendall commentedI noticed that this also affects theme tar.gz files as well.
main drupal LICENSE.txt:
51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301 USAthemes LICENSE.txt:
59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307 USAI'm going to raise the priority
Comment #2
Uwe Hermann commentedPing. This is an easy fix for someone who has access to the proper infrastructure...
Comment #3
webchickMoving to drupal.org infrastructure queue.
Comment #4
sepeck commentedLink above is to GPL3. Drupal is GPL2
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.html
Comment #5
pwolanin commentedDrupal is GPL, not specifically GPL 2.0, but as far as I can tell, Drupal 6 will still be distributed with a copy of the 2.0 license
Comment #6
david straussNo, Drupal is GPL 2.0. The LICENSE.txt file distributed with Drupal simply includes the GPL 2.0. That means modules and changes are required to be re-licensable under the GPL 2.0 (if distributed), but that does not mean consent has been given to have the work licensed under newer GPL versions.
Comment #7
pwolanin commented@David Strauss - check with Crell - I think my interpretation above is also what the basis he is working from.
Comment #8
david strauss@pwolanin:
There are two ways a project can have GPL flexibility:
(1) The code is contributed under the GPL with an addendum that the work may be relicensed under "the GPL version 2 or higher as published by the Free Software Foundation." I'm not aware of Drupal doing this.
(2) Permission of all copyright holders is obtained. "All copyright holders" can be only one entity if all contributors give up their ownership to a defined organization, like the Free Software Foundation. I'm not aware of Drupal doing this.
You cannot simply slap the GPL 3 on GPL 2 code. You can slap the corresponding version of the GPL on LGPL code.
Comment #9
pwolanin commented@David - see the GPL:
"If the Program does not specify a version number of this License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free Software Foundation."
Comment #10
mfbDrupal's LICENSE.txt reads:
So it seems Drupal is GPL 2.0 or later.
Comment #11
david strauss@mfb: The text you're quoting is under the instructions beneath the license (which ends with "END OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS") under a section titled "How to Apply These Terms to Your New Programs." This is not a statement from the Drupal project.
@pwolanin: This is more plausible, especially given chx's research.
chx has also informed me that the Association is going to issue a paper written by an actual lawyer on this topic, so I'll hold off on further discussion until I can see that.
Comment #12
mfbWell I am hoping that I can distribute Drupal under GPL 3 as I already have distributed it with some AGPL 3 modules. I guess the lawyers know where to find me if I'm in violation :/
Comment #13
Uwe Hermann commentedThis issue is not critical.
The URL I linked to had the GPL2 text earlier, now it contains the GPL3 text. The new GPL2 URL is http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.txt.
This is definately the wrong issue/bug page for GPL2 vs. GPL3 discussions. This issue is only about updating the GPL2 text in LICENSE.txt to the latest version from the above mentioned URL.
New patch attached.
Comment #14
pwolanin commented@Uwe - if that's the issue, then this shoudl be an issue against core.
Comment #15
Crell commentedLet this issue live or die in core. :-)
Comment #16
keith.smith commentedAs far as I can tell, isn't this just spacing changes? I don't see any substantive changes at all. There's an extra comma in one line, and the address has one fewer space between the state and zip (and the bottom occurrence of it is formatted a bit differently). This version does (on visual inspection) seem to reflect the current version at the url in #13.
Comment #17
lyricnz commentedDrupal Core itself only has whitespace/trivial differences
but the copy provided with contrib (themes+modules) is more different. The address is different, the line wrapping is different, and then section "How to Apply These Terms to Your New Programs" is removed:
Comment #18
keith.smith commentedWhy not just make these very small changes to core's LICENSE.txt, and then reset this issue to use core's patched LICENSE.txt as the automatic license file in the packaging system.
Comment #19
webchickOk, committed #13 to HEAD.
Looks like it should go into 6.x and 5.x as well.
Comment #20
gábor hojtsyI do not think removing the CVS $id part from the file was right. Please fix. Not committed.
Comment #21
keith.smith commentedGabor: The patch in #13 (which webchick committed) doesn't remove that line.
Comment #22
gábor hojtsyOk, great, thanks, #13 committed to Drupal 6.
Comment #23
gábor hojtsyOh, #13 should go into 5.x as well.
Comment #24
drummCommitted to 5.x.