[arch-general] License for libdrm packages

[mpan]

> Hello. I was repacking amdgpu-pro deb files and when I started converting licences, I have noticed that libdrm* packages have a MIT Licence text in copyright file. I decided to check if AUR/libdrm-git and Extra/libdrm uses MIT licence, but they don't. I contacted Lone_Wolf (maintainer of libdrm-git) and he said that he used a licence from Extra/libdrm.
> Should not it be changed to MIT instead of custom?
  “MIT-style license” is a class of licenses, not a specific one. Each
software using MIT-style licensing is having its own, independent
license text. While in practice they may be nearly identical (modulo
copyright line), they’re in fact separate licenses. The topic is
discussed on the wiki:
<https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pkgbuild#license>.

In particular the terms include:
 ------
  The above copyright notice and this permission notice (including the
  next paragraph) shall be included in all copies or substantial
  portions of the Software.
 ------
Which means that if multiple MIT-licensed pieces of software are
combined, the complete notice of each of them has to be included in the
final work. And this is exactly what happens in case of libdrm:
<https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/tree/trunk/COPYING?h=packages/libdrm&id=b080357775c306e74a4257099ab4197604c4f57b>.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/attachments/20190523/4a6d3328/attachment.sig>