ansi2knr proposed update

ansi2knr proposed update

[Geoff Wing]

Heyla,
ansi2knr bombs out on Src/params.c

Either we need to kluge Src/params.c or update ansi2knr.c
The most recent version of the latter I've seen is
    ftp://mirror.cs.wisc.edu/pub/mirrors/ghost/ansi2knr.c
I've confirmed it works on NetBSD but nothing else yet.  If there are
no objections, I'm willing to update it when I've tested it on some more
platforms.

The licence seems to be the same as the one we currently have,
though we don't distribute the GNU file COPYING.

Speaking of licences, what does our LICENCE para 3 mean "...even if and..."?

Regards,
-- 
Geoff Wing : <gcw@pobox.com>
Rxvt Stuff : <gcw@rxvt.org>
Zsh Stuff  : <gcw@zsh.org>

Re: ansi2knr proposed update

[Clint Adams]

> The licence seems to be the same as the one we currently have,
> though we don't distribute the GNU file COPYING.

Uh-oh.  We've been violating the GPL for quite some time then.

Re: ansi2knr proposed update

[Geoff Wing]

Clint Adams <clint@zsh.org> typed:
:> The licence seems to be the same as the one we currently have,
:> though we don't distribute the GNU file COPYING.
:Uh-oh.  We've been violating the GPL for quite some time then.

Which version of it are you reading?  I just looked through GPL version 2
and I couldn't interpret it to mean that it was a requirement to
redistribute the Licence file "COPYING".  Maybe I missed something?

Regards,
-- 
Geoff Wing : <gcw@pobox.com>
Rxvt Stuff : <gcw@rxvt.org>
Zsh Stuff  : <gcw@zsh.org>

Re: ansi2knr proposed update

[Clint Adams]

> Which version of it are you reading?  I just looked through GPL version 2
> and I couldn't interpret it to mean that it was a requirement to
> redistribute the Licence file "COPYING".  Maybe I missed something?

It doesn't require that the file be named "COPYING", but it does
require that the license be distributed with the program,
just as the Zsh licence requires that the Zsh licence be
distributed with Zsh.

In GPL-2, this is the term numbered 1:

  1. You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's
source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you
conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate
copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty; keep intact all the
notices that refer to this License and to the absence of any warranty;
and give any other recipients of the Program a copy of this License
along with the Program.

By not doing so, we're violating the license of ansi2knr, assuming
that it's the GNU GPL.

On the other hand, the copyright line says "All rights reserved",
and who knows in which jurisdictions that invalidates the
license?

Re: ansi2knr proposed update

[Geoff Wing]

I wrote:
:Maybe I missed something?

Guess, I did :-)

So the most likely options seem to me to be:
1) distribute GNU's GPL as ansi2knr.something
2) don't distribute ansi2knr.c in the main bundle but leave the
   hooks in and tell people where to find ansi2knr.c
   I don't think it would be a problem to put them in a separate
   directory on the zsh FTP mirrors
3) make a new directory to put stuff like this that is covered by
   a different licen{c,s}e  and move the appropriate files (and
   licen{c,s}es) there

I'm currently most partial to 2 but am happy to hear other options
and opinions.

Regards,
Geoff

Re: ansi2knr proposed update

[Bart Schaefer]

On Aug 24,  2:46pm, Geoff Wing wrote:
} 
} 2) don't distribute ansi2knr.c in the main bundle but leave the
}    hooks in and tell people where to find ansi2knr.c
}    I don't think it would be a problem to put them in a separate
}    directory on the zsh FTP mirrors

This sounds fine to me.  Of course, that probably means that configure
should croak upon --enable-ansi2knr if it can't find it either in $PATH
or in source form in Src/.

-- 
Bart Schaefer                                 Brass Lantern Enterprises
http://www.well.com/user/barts              http://www.brasslantern.com

Zsh: http://www.zsh.org | PHPerl Project: http://phperl.sourceforge.net   

Re: ansi2knr proposed update

[Peter Stephenson]

Geoff Wing wrote:
> 2) don't distribute ansi2knr.c in the main bundle but leave the
>    hooks in and tell people where to find ansi2knr.c
>    I don't think it would be a problem to put them in a separate
>    directory on the zsh FTP mirrors

This sounds OK, since I don't think many people are using ansi2knr any
more, but is there anything wrong with copying it into the C file?  It's
not there probably because it is assumed to apply to other files, which
it doesn't here.  Or if it does, why not put them all in a separate
subdirectory?

-- 
Peter Stephenson <pws@pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk>
Work: pws@csr.com
Web: http://www.pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk

Re: ansi2knr proposed update

[Geoff Wing]

Peter Stephenson <pws@pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk> typed:
:Geoff Wing wrote:
:> 2) don't distribute ansi2knr.c in the main bundle but leave the
:>    hooks in and tell people where to find ansi2knr.c
:>    I don't think it would be a problem to put them in a separate
:>    directory on the zsh FTP mirrors
:This sounds OK, since I don't think many people are using ansi2knr any
:more, but is there anything wrong with copying it into the C file?

Updated suggestion:
Make subdirectory "GPL" (or something"/GPL") on FTP site.
Put in GPL/COPYING
       GPL/ansi2knr.c
       GPL/texi2html.tar.gz
       GPL/yodl-1.31.18.tar.gz
Put LICENCE (zsh licence) into main FTP directory.
Remove ansi2knr.c from main distribution
Make "configure --enable-ansi2knr" bomb out if it can't find ansi2knr

This way we're only distributing stuff in our main bundle under the
Zsh LICENCE and if people want other stuff under a different licence
we provide pointers for them (i.e. see main FTP site).

Regards,
-- 
Geoff Wing  <gcw@pobox.com>
rxvt stuff  <gcw@rxvt.org>
zsh stuff   <gcw@zsh.org>

Re: ansi2knr proposed update

[Peter Stephenson]

Geoff Wing wrote:
> Updated suggestion:
> Make subdirectory "GPL" (or something"/GPL") on FTP site.
> Put in GPL/COPYING
>        GPL/ansi2knr.c
>        GPL/texi2html.tar.gz
>        GPL/yodl-1.31.18.tar.gz
> Put LICENCE (zsh licence) into main FTP directory.
> Remove ansi2knr.c from main distribution
> Make "configure --enable-ansi2knr" bomb out if it can't find ansi2knr

I'd be happy with that as the cleanest option --- it would certainly be
nice to have the doc tools available on the same site.  I can't imagine
*that* many people need ansi2knr?

-- 
Peter Stephenson <pws@csr.com>                  Software Engineer
CSR Ltd., Unit 300, Science Park, Milton Road,
Cambridge, CB4 0XL, UK                          Tel: +44 (0)1223 392070


**********************************************************************
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or
entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential 
and/or privileged material. 
Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or
taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by 
persons or entities other than the intended recipient is 
prohibited.  
If you received this in error, please contact the sender and 
delete the material from any computer.
**********************************************************************

Re: ansi2knr proposed update

[Oliver Kiddle]

Clint Adams wrote:
> 
> > The licence seems to be the same as the one we currently have,
> > though we don't distribute the GNU file COPYING.
> 
> Uh-oh.  We've been violating the GPL for quite some time then.

Yeah, the GPL is fairly clear on that. There is nothing which states
that the licence has to be in a file named `COPYING' though so it might
be better to call it ansi2knr-licence or something like that otherwise
people might mistakenly think zsh is GPLd. Or we could stick the whole
GPL in a comment in ansi2knr.c.

Geoff Wing wrote:

> Speaking of licences, what does our LICENCE para 3 mean "...even if and..."?

Doesn't make sense really does it. Digging out an old copy of zsh, Paul
Falstad's name used to appear between `if' and `and'. Whoever removed it
must have messed up so I think we can just remove the word `and'.

Where does the zsh licence originate from out of interest?

Oliver

_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by the 
MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further information visit
http://www.messagelabs.com/stats.asp

Re: ansi2knr proposed update

[Clint Adams]

> Doesn't make sense really does it. Digging out an old copy of zsh, Paul
> Falstad's name used to appear between `if' and `and'. Whoever removed it
> must have messed up so I think we can just remove the word `and'.

On the other hand, leaving out actual names puts "The Zsh Development Group"
into potentially more questionable legal standing.

Re: ansi2knr proposed update

[Oliver Kiddle]

Clint Adams wrote:
> 
> On the other hand, leaving out actual names puts "The Zsh Development Group"
> into potentially more questionable legal standing.

"The Zsh development group" is defined earlier in the licence. Also, it
is important that the disclaimer of warranty applies to everyone who has
ever contributed as much as one line of code and not just the core
developers. The GPL uses "any copyright holder, or any other party who
may modify and/or redistribute the program as permitted above".

Another thing which seems a little odd in the zsh licence is the bit
which says "without licence".

_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by the 
MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further information visit
http://www.messagelabs.com/stats.asp

Re: ansi2knr proposed update

[Peter Stephenson]

Oliver Kiddle wrote:
> Doesn't make sense really does it. Digging out an old copy of zsh, Paul
> Falstad's name used to appear between `if' and `and'. Whoever removed it
> must have messed up so I think we can just remove the word `and'.

Or if that's a problem, insert `the above named', or something.  The
names are supposed to be a list of people who are actually mentioned in
the copyright details of individual files, but as you pointed out it's
supposed to extend to everyone.

> Where does the zsh licence originate from out of interest?

It's supposed to have been like BSD, but they may just be folklore by
now.

-- 
Peter Stephenson <pws@pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk>
Work: pws@csr.com
Web: http://www.pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk