Note: There are a few cases of duplicates in user autocompletion which are being worked on.

stylo: Ensure that about:license includes licenses for third-party rust crates vendored for Servo

NEW
Assigned to

Status

()

Firefox
General
P1
normal
a month ago
18 days ago

People

(Reporter: cpeterson, Assigned: cpeterson)

Tracking

(Blocks: 1 bug)

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)

Details

(Assignee)

Description

a month ago
Firefox's about:license page:
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/file/tip/toolkit/content/license.html

Servo's license list:
https://github.com/servo/servo/blob/master/python/tidy/servo_tidy/licenseck.py#L35
(Assignee)

Comment 1

29 days ago
Gerv, most of Servo's third-party libraries' licenses are already listed in Firefox's about:license page, but I have some questions and possible omissions:

* MIT: about:license lists MIT, but calls it "MIT license — microformat-shiv" and says the license applies to "some files in the directory toolkit/components/microformats". Do we need a standalone entry for generic MIT license?

* APLv2/MIT dual-license: about:license has entries for APLv2 and MIT, but some rust libraries are dual-licensed APLv2/MIT. Do we need a separate entry for APLv2/MIT dual-license?

* ISC: about:license lists ISC (Internet Systems Consortium), but has a comment that "This license applies to the files nsprpub/pr/src/misc/praton.c and media/mtransport/third_party/nrappkit/src/util/util.c." Do we need to remove or expand that comment now that ISC will apply to additional files? The comment does not say the ISC license only applies to those files...

* BSD: about:license includes "Google BSD License", but does not mention BSD-2-Clause, BSD-3-Clause, or BSD-3-Clause/MIT dual-license.

* Unlicense/MIT dual-license (http://unlicense.org/)

* CC0-1.0: about:license mentions CC0 as part of the Lodash license, but does not have a standalone entry for CC0-1.0.

* FreeType License (FTL): about:license mentions that some code is "copyright ©1996-2012 The FreeType Project", but does not have an entry for FreeType license.
Flags: needinfo?(gerv)
Summary: Ensure that about:license includes licenses for third-party rust crates vendored for Servo → stylo: Ensure that about:license includes licenses for third-party rust crates vendored for Servo
(In reply to Chris Peterson [:cpeterson] from comment #1)
> * MIT: about:license lists MIT, but calls it "MIT license —
> microformat-shiv" and says the license applies to "some files in the
> directory toolkit/components/microformats". Do we need a standalone entry
> for generic MIT license?

Sadly there is not such a thing as a "generic MIT license" because the MIT license contains a copyright line (which is different for each bit of software) and requires that the whole license be reproduced. So we need a new entry for each unique MIT license.

> * APLv2/MIT dual-license: about:license has entries for APLv2 and MIT, but
> some rust libraries are dual-licensed APLv2/MIT. Do we need a separate entry
> for APLv2/MIT dual-license?

No. We can use those libraries under the APL, and that is already present.

> * ISC: about:license lists ISC (Internet Systems Consortium), but has a
> comment that "This license applies to the files nsprpub/pr/src/misc/praton.c
> and media/mtransport/third_party/nrappkit/src/util/util.c." Do we need to
> remove or expand that comment now that ISC will apply to additional files?
> The comment does not say the ISC license only applies to those files...

For accuracy of documentation, please expand the comment to give details of the new files to which this licence applies. Note that you can give a directory name as well as a set of filenames; see other examples elsewhere in about:license.

> * BSD: about:license includes "Google BSD License", but does not mention
> BSD-2-Clause, BSD-3-Clause, or BSD-3-Clause/MIT dual-license.

Again, these are generic license names; about:licence contains copies of concrete license texts. Which texts need to be included?

> * Unlicense/MIT dual-license (http://unlicense.org/)

We can use this under MIT; we'd need to include a copy of the MIT option.

> * CC0-1.0: about:license mentions CC0 as part of the Lodash license, but
> does not have a standalone entry for CC0-1.0.

CC0 is a PD dedication and as such we are not required to document that we are using code under it. We may want to add the details to the credit list at the bottom under Optional Notices.

> * FreeType License (FTL): about:license mentions that some code is
> "copyright ©1996-2012 The FreeType Project", but does not have an entry for
> FreeType license.

It may be that the reason it's not there is that it's not necessary. Please point me at the license text concerned.

Gerv
Flags: needinfo?(gerv)
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.