[arch-projects] [archweb] Licensing issues with JS code

Eli Schwartz eschwartz at archlinux.org
Sun Jan 7 15:55:45 UTC 2018

On 01/07/2018 10:12 AM, Adonay Felipe Nogueira wrote:
> What's the status of this after our last message here?
> I have some questions that you can ask the ArchLinux meetings in order
> help solve this:
> 1. For things provided by the ArchLinux project and which have the
>    problematic licenses, has ArchLinux agreed license change?
>    Rephrasing the above: has the copyright holders agreed to do so?
> 2. If no license change will be done, can we remove the GPL-2.0-only
>    ([1]) incompatible dependencies?

Not really sure what the issue is, are we actually in violation of
anything, and if so what? For example, quickly googling for konami.js
shows me several github repos that *all* claim to be MIT licensed.

I would blindly assume that the original developers of our javascript
knew something about licenses, and at most failed to clarify the
original sourcing of thirdparty components, which would mean that it is
a simple matter of adding clarification notes. I'm sure no one would
reject patches that added clarification of copyrights.

But FWIW git claims all javascript files in archweb were
authored/committed by Dan McGee, with the exception of a syntax error
fix (partial commit reversion only, so I don't know that that counts) in
ddb7f4825f8bf70142735a5ba2f7729ffe5d27c1 by Evangelos Foutras. You
should probably contact them directly, and ask them to relicense under
GPL2+ or something if it is really important for your derivative use, as
this doesn't seem to be a priority for anyone on our end.

Eli Schwartz

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-projects/attachments/20180107/70b11d4d/attachment.asc>

More information about the arch-projects mailing list