421046 - Remove GPL/LGPL options from any tri-licensed files

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Bugzilla :: Bugzilla-General, defect)

Description

[Gervase Markham [:gerv]]

Ohloh currently says Bugzilla is a GPL/MPL mix, and warns that this may be incompatible. Now we know better, but the vast majority of Bugzilla code is MPL-only and it does make sense to have it all that way, to avoid confusion. So this bug is about "collapsing" any tri-licensed files into their MPL incarnations. This is perfectly legal.

Note that this bug makes no judgement on the wisdom, feasibility or otherwise of relicensing Bugzilla to the tri-licence, or any other licence, at a later time. (No such relicensing is currently planned.)

Gerv

Comment 1

[Vitaly Fedrushkov]

At least some l10n projects say 'GPL' on their sf.net pages.  Will check and summarize at http://wiki.mozilla.org/Bugzilla:L10n:Localization_Teams

Comment 2

[Max Kanat-Alexander]

(In reply to comment #1)
> At least some l10n projects say 'GPL' on their sf.net pages.  Will check and
> summarize at http://wiki.mozilla.org/Bugzilla:L10n:Localization_Teams

  That's fine, individual localization packs can be GPL, but then they can't be distributed together with Bugzilla itself.

Comment 3

[Vitaly Fedrushkov]

(In reply to comment #2)
>   That's fine, individual localization packs can be GPL, but then they can't be
> distributed together with Bugzilla itself.

Please clarify:

Most l10n packs are template sets directly derived from their English (MPL) ancestors.  New template files are uncommon (Bugzilla-ja only?).  Can MPL-derived code be GPL?

See also http://www.tomhull.com/ocston/docs/mozgpl.html

Comment 4

[A. Shimono [:himorin]]

(In reply to comment #3)
> >   That's fine, individual localization packs can be GPL, but then they can't be
> > distributed together with Bugzilla itself.
> 
> Please clarify:
> 
> Most l10n packs are template sets directly derived from their English (MPL)
> ancestors.  New template files are uncommon (Bugzilla-ja only?).  Can
> MPL-derived code be GPL?

For current Bugzilla-ja, i think the code part (i18n patches) is the same as Bugzilla itself. And, the same for templates. (Of cource, it's ok and easy to change the license for them.)
But for docs, i thought that it is licensed by GDFL? (now, we don't have a Japanese doc set in Bugzilla-ja :p)

We've started the squash party for 3.2 templates and docs, recently. So we'll be happy to discuss about the license now.
http://www.mozilla.gr.jp/~shimono/blog/?p=28 (only in Japanese)

Comment 5

[Gervase Markham [:gerv]]

(In reply to comment #2)
>   That's fine, individual localization packs can be GPL, but then they can't be
> distributed together with Bugzilla itself.

That's not actually true. Because a localisation pack is a derivative work of Bugzilla (you start with the MPLed files and translate them), it must be made available under the MPL also. (MPL section 3.1, sentence 1.)

Any pack which does not do this is technically in breach of copyright. So if there are some, we should probably contact them and get it fixed :-)

Gerv

Comment 6

[Gervase Markham [:gerv]]

OK, so my relicensing script says the only tri-licensed file is:
./js/keyword-chooser.js

However, there are so many non-standard and mangled licensing blocks (and therefore errors) that I had to grep for "GNU General" as well. That showed up:
template/en/default/bug/keyword-chooser.html.tmpl

I think these are the only two.

Gerv

Comment 7

[Gervase Markham [:gerv]]

Attachment: Patch v.1

Here's a patch

Comment 8

[Frédéric Buclin]

These files do not exist in Bugzilla 3.0, and a grep cannot find any other occurence of GPL there. So these are indeed the only two files to fix, and on 3.2 only.

Comment 9

[Max Kanat-Alexander]

Comment on attachment 309140 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch v.1

Looks good to me. I also filed bug 370214 a while ago to fix some of the various mangled blocks.

Comment 10

[Vitaly Fedrushkov]

FWIW: l10n licensing summary at http://wiki.mozilla.org/Bugzilla:L10n:Localization_Teams

Bugzilla-cn (erroneously) states GPL on site
http://wiki.mozilla.org/Bugzilla:L10n:Localization_Teams#Simplified_3.1.2

Bugzilla-kr has translated license text
http://wiki.mozilla.org/Bugzilla:L10n:Localization_Teams#Korean

Bugzilla-rus states 'Public domain' on site
http://wiki.mozilla.org/Bugzilla:L10n:Localization_Teams#Russian

Bugzilla-es states both GPL and MPL 1.1
http://wiki.mozilla.org/Bugzilla:L10n:Localization_Teams#Spanish

Some projects have no clear statement of their license on site, but use MPL 1.1 de facto.

One project (Turkish) seems to have no site at all

Comment 11

[Frédéric Buclin]

Checking in js/keyword-chooser.js;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/js/keyword-chooser.js,v  <--  keyword-chooser.js
new revision: 1.3; previous revision: 1.2
done
Checking in template/en/default/bug/keyword-chooser.html.tmpl;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/template/en/default/bug/keyword-chooser.html.tmpl,v  <--  keyword-chooser.html.tmpl
new revision: 1.3; previous revision: 1.2
done