Forums : Technical Issue Help
Dear Open Hub Users,
We’re excited to announce that we will be moving the Open Hub Forum to
https://community.synopsys.com/s/black-duck-open-hub.
Beginning immediately, users can head over,
register,
get technical help and discuss issue pertinent to the Open Hub. Registered users can also subscribe to Open Hub announcements here.
On May 1, 2020, we will be freezing https://www.openhub.net/forums and users will not be able to create new discussions. If you have any questions and concerns, please email us at
[email protected]
Faulty license detection.
Hi!
The ggivnc project is licensed under the X11 license (or MIT if you like), but it doesn't say so explicitely anywhere in the files I think. It just has the license text as shown on e.g. wikipedia. However, ohloh claims that some 50-odd files are GPLd. That's bogus, ggivnc has never been GPL. The only mention of GPL or General Public
is in the documentation about competing offers and in 10 or so autotools files that come with a GPL-with-exception license (libtool.m4 etc). So, GPL has nothing to do with the license of the code itself...
I think the license detection code in ohloh needs work.
Cheers,
Peter
Hi Peter,
Yes, I agree in general that the license detection can use improvement.
However, where do you see the claim for 50-odd files? I see only a single file listed under GPL:
https://www.ohloh.net/p/ggivnc/analyses/latest
As you expected, that file turns out to be build-aux/ltmain.sh. You're correct, this file contains a license exception and shouldn't be listed as a GPL violation. Our detector isn't smart enough to recognize the exception.
It's a common situtation (there's a lot of ltmain.sh out there), and it does seem reasonable that we could recognize it. I've opened a ticket for this, but no guarantees on timing.
Thanks,
Robin
Oh, sorry for not adding a note here as well, but it's the same story as in https://www.ohloh.net/forums/10/topics/3872
Sorry about that and thanks for adding the ticket!
Cheers,
Peter