[log in to unmask] writes:
> Those supporting DS9 and Astlib may find it acceptable (indeed may
> prefer) to stop distributing SLALIB/C/O directly and to rely on it
> being available through Debian as non-free/contrib.
I am afraid that they need to: both packages are put under (L)GPL which
requires for the source code:
| The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for
| making modifications to it.
This clearly does not apply to SLALIB/C/O; so (L)GPL is not a valid
license for them. To put ds9 and astlib under (L)GPL, this code needs to
be removed.
BTW, for astlib, the license is not clear for me: the source code comes
with GPL and LGPL licenses, and some of the files are GPL (object.c),
others are LGPL (wcs subsystem). So, I assume, that (except the license
problem for pal.c resp. SLALIB/C/O) the whole package is GPL licensed?
>> However, is there an "obfuscated" slalib-C source package
>> available for download?
> I can provide one (as [log in to unmask]) as long as the terms
> of its Debian release do not change its existing IPR status and the
> prohibition on use for profit.
Could you formulate a valid license here? "ast/pal.c" is put under GPL,
which does (aside from the problems discussed above) not restrict its
use to non-profit, and also allows the user to change the name.
The latter is important since for a compatible library, the names should
match. So either slalib/Fortran should provide additionally palFoo()
symbols, or pal.c should be reset to slaFoo().
Best
Ole
----
Starlink User Support list
For list configuration, including subscribing to and unsubscribing from the list, see
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=STARLINK
|