GNU bug report logs - #61950
[PATCH] lint: Add 'copyleft' checker.

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 61950 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 61950 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Antero Mejr <antero <at> mailbox.org>
To: guix-patches <at> gnu.org
Cc: Antero Mejr <antero <at> mailbox.org>
Subject: [PATCH] lint: Add 'copyleft' checker.
Date: Sat,  4 Mar 2023 04:14:58 +0000

* guix/lint.scm (check-copyleft, input->package, report-copyleft-violation,
linking-exception?, copyleft?): New procedures.
(%local-checkers): Add 'copyleft' checker.
* tests/lint.scm ("copyleft: incompatible copyleft input"): New tests.
* doc/guix.texi (Invoking guix lint): Mention it.
---
This new linter checks for copyleft license violations, where a copylefted
package is linked by a package with an incompatible license.
It found 2818 incompatible packages.
For example, GNU readline (GPL) is being linked by 71 permissively
licensed packages.

 doc/guix.texi  |   4 ++
 guix/lint.scm  | 109 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 tests/lint.scm |  10 +++++
 3 files changed, 123 insertions(+)

diff --git a/doc/guix.texi b/doc/guix.texi
index 74658dbc86..be695967a2 100644
--- a/doc/guix.texi
+++ b/doc/guix.texi
@@ -14723,6 +14723,10 @@ corresponding package.  This aims to help migrate from the ``old input
 style''.  @xref{package Reference}, for more information on package
 inputs and input styles.  @xref{Invoking guix style}, on how to migrate
 to the new style.
+
+@item copyleft
+Warn about packages with permissive licenses that are not compatible with
+the copyleft licenses of their dependencies.
 @end table
 
 The general syntax is:
diff --git a/guix/lint.scm b/guix/lint.scm
index 8e3976171f..30745b0930 100644
--- a/guix/lint.scm
+++ b/guix/lint.scm
@@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ (define-module (guix lint)
   #:use-module (guix download)
   #:use-module (guix ftp-client)
   #:use-module (guix http-client)
+  #:use-module (guix licenses)
   #:use-module (guix packages)
   #:use-module (guix i18n)
   #:use-module ((guix gexp)
@@ -108,6 +109,7 @@ (define-module (guix lint)
             check-mirror-url
             check-github-url
             check-license
+            check-copyleft
             check-vulnerabilities
             check-for-updates
             check-formatting
@@ -1451,6 +1453,12 @@ (define format
       (with-store store
         (do-check store))))
 
+
+
+;;;
+;;; Package licenses.
+;;;
+
 (define (check-license package)
   "Warn about type errors of the 'license' field of PACKAGE."
   (match (package-license package)
@@ -1462,6 +1470,103 @@ (define (check-license package)
       (make-warning package (G_ "invalid license field")
                     #:field 'license)))))
 
+(define (copyleft? licenses)
+  "Check if a list of licenses are copyleft."
+  (let ((lic (if (list? licenses) licenses (list licenses))))
+    (map (lambda (x)
+           (and (license? x) ;some license fields are not license objects
+                (member (license-name x)
+                        '("AGPL 1" "AGPL 3" "AGPL 3+"
+                          "CC-BY-SA 2.0" "CC-BY-SA 3.0" "CC-BY-SA 4.0"
+                          "CeCILL" "copyleft-next"
+                          "EUPL 1.1" "EUPL 1.2"
+                          "GPL 1" "GPL 1+" "GPL 2" "GPL 2+" "GPL 3" "GPL 3+"
+                          "Sleepycat"))
+                #t))
+         lic)))
+
+(define (linking-exception? package)
+  "Check if a package has a known copyleft linking exception or is not linked."
+  (and (member (package-name package)
+               '(;; linking exception
+                 "classpath" "guile" "java-classpathx-servletapi" "icedtea"
+                 "uwsgi"
+                 ;; copyleft but not typically linked
+                 "alsa-utils" "acpi" "acpica" "audit"
+                 "bash" "bash-completion" "bash-minimal" "bash-static" "bc"
+                 "bluez" "binutils" "bison" "btrfs-progs"
+                 "catdoc" "cdparanoia" "colord" "colord-minimal" "coreutils"
+                 "coreutils-minimal" "cpuid" "cpupower" "cryptsetup"
+                 "dbus" "dbus-glib" "diffutils" "dmidecode" "dmraid" "dnsmasq"
+                 "dosfstools" "dpkg"
+                 "ebtables" "edac-utils" "egawk-next" "efibootmgr" "espeak"
+                 "espeak-ng" "ethtool" "eudev"
+                 "fcitx" "ffmpeg" "findutils" "fontforge"
+                 "gawk" "gawk-mpfr" "geoclue" "gettext" "gettext-minimal"
+                 "ghostscript" "git" "git-minimal" "gjs" "gnupg" "gnome-desktop"
+                 "gpart" "gperf" "gpm" "grep" "groff" "gzip"
+                 "hddtemp" "hwinfo" "kbd" "kexec-tools" "kmod"
+                 "less" "lm-sensors" "lzip"
+                 "i2c-tools" "inetutils" "inxi" "inxi-minimal" "iproute2"
+                 "iptables" "iso-codes"
+                 "m4" "make" "mariadb" "mawk" "mcelog" "mdadm" "memtester"
+                 "miscfiles" "modem-manager" "module-init-tools" "mpv" "mysql"
+                 "ndctl" "net-tools" "netcat" "nvme-cli"
+                 "pandoc" "parted" "password-store" "pciutils" "perl"
+                 "pkg-config" "postgresql" "procps" "psmisc" "pulseaudio"
+                 "qemu" "qemu-minimal" "ragel" "rpm" "rsync"
+                 "samba" "sane-backends" "sbc" "scummvm" "sed"
+                 "shared-mime-info" "shepherd" "smartmontools" "socat"
+                 "squashfs-tools" "sysstat"
+                 "tar" "time" "torsocks"
+                 "upower" "usbutils" "util-linux"
+                 "valgrind" "vidstab" "volume-key"
+                 "wget" "which" "wl-clipboard" "yelp" "xclip"
+                 "linux-libre-headers" "gnumach-headers" "hurd-headers"
+                 "gcc" "gcc-toolchain" "gfortran" "clang-toolchain"
+                 "ld-wrapper" "ld.lld-wrapper" "lld-wrapper"))
+       #t))
+
+(define (report-copyleft-violation package input-name)
+  "Report information about a copyleft license violation."
+  (make-warning package
+                (G_ "The license of input ~a is copyleft, but the license \
+of package ~a is permissive.")
+                (list input-name (package-name package))
+                #:field 'license))
+
+(define (input->package input)
+  "Convert a package input into a package if possible."
+  (if (list? input)
+      (cadr input)
+      #f))
+
+(define (check-copyleft package)
+  "Check that PACKAGE does not violate copyleft licenses of its inputs."
+  ;; Assumes all copyleft licenses are compatible, which is true for now
+  (let* ((pkg-copyleft (member #t (copyleft? (package-license package)))))
+    (apply append
+           (map (lambda (input)
+                  (let ((input-copyleft
+                         ;; if any license is permissive, the input is.
+                         ;; be lenient here to avoid false positives
+                         (not (member #f (copyleft? (package-license input))))))
+                    (if (and input-copyleft
+                             (not pkg-copyleft)
+                             (not (linking-exception? input)))
+                        (list (report-copyleft-violation package
+                                                         (package-name input)))
+                        '())))
+                (filter package?
+                        (map input->package
+                             (append (package-inputs package)
+                                     (package-propagated-inputs package))))))))
+
+
+;;;
+;;; Vulnerabilities and updates.
+;;;
+
 (define (current-vulnerabilities*)
   "Like 'current-vulnerabilities', but return the empty list upon networking
 or HTTP errors.  This allows network-less operation and makes problems with
@@ -1885,6 +1990,10 @@ (define %local-checkers
      (description "Make sure the 'license' field is a <license> \
 or a list thereof")
      (check       check-license))
+   (lint-checker
+    (name        'copyleft)
+    (description "Check for copyleft license violations")
+    (check       check-copyleft))
    (lint-checker
      (name        'optional-tests)
      (description "Make sure tests are only run when requested")
diff --git a/tests/lint.scm b/tests/lint.scm
index ce22e2355a..1ae64510b6 100644
--- a/tests/lint.scm
+++ b/tests/lint.scm
@@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ (define-module (test-lint)
   #:use-module (guix build-system emacs)
   #:use-module (guix build-system gnu)
   #:use-module (guix packages)
+  #:use-module ((guix licenses) #:prefix license:)
   #:use-module (guix lint)
   #:use-module (guix ui)
   #:use-module (guix swh)
@@ -51,6 +52,7 @@ (define-module (test-lint)
   #:use-module (gnu packages glib)
   #:use-module (gnu packages pkg-config)
   #:use-module (gnu packages python-build)
+  #:use-module (gnu packages readline)
   #:use-module ((gnu packages bash) #:select (bash bash-minimal))
   #:use-module (web uri)
   #:use-module (web server)
@@ -665,6 +667,14 @@ (define hsab (string-append (assoc-ref inputs "hsab")
   (single-lint-warning-message
    (check-license (dummy-package "x" (license #f)))))
 
+(test-equal "copyleft: incompatible copyleft input"
+  "The license of input readline is copyleft, but the license of package x is permissive."
+  (single-lint-warning-message
+   (check-copyleft
+    (dummy-package "x"
+                   (inputs `(("readline" ,readline)))
+                   (license license:bsd-3)))))
+
 (test-equal "home-page: wrong home-page"
   "invalid value for home page"
   (let ((pkg (package
-- 
2.38.1

Message #8 received at 61950 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Antero Mejr <antero <at> mailbox.org>
To: 61950 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Cc: Antero Mejr <antero <at> mailbox.org>
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] gnu: libsndfile: Correct license.
Date: Sat,  4 Mar 2023 04:22:28 +0000

* gnu/packages/pulseaudio.scm (libsndfile)[license]: Change to lgpl2.1+.
---
Updating package licenses to avoid false positives.

 gnu/packages/pulseaudio.scm | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/gnu/packages/pulseaudio.scm b/gnu/packages/pulseaudio.scm
index 75aca3d700..aff864eb99 100644
--- a/gnu/packages/pulseaudio.scm
+++ b/gnu/packages/pulseaudio.scm
@@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ (define-public libsndfile
 as big-endian processor systems such as Motorola 68k, Power PC, MIPS and
 SPARC.  Hopefully the design of the library will also make it easy to extend
 for reading and writing new sound file formats.")
-    (license l:gpl2+)))
+    (license l:lgpl2.1+)))
 
 (define-public libsamplerate
   (package
-- 
2.38.1

Message #11 received at 61950 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Antero Mejr <antero <at> mailbox.org>
To: 61950 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Cc: Antero Mejr <antero <at> mailbox.org>
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] gnu: libcap: Add bsd-3 license.
Date: Sat,  4 Mar 2023 04:22:29 +0000

* gnu/packages/linux.scm (libcap)[license]: Add bsd-3.
---
 gnu/packages/linux.scm | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/gnu/packages/linux.scm b/gnu/packages/linux.scm
index 3ca2a79666..9f5a2fd84f 100644
--- a/gnu/packages/linux.scm
+++ b/gnu/packages/linux.scm
@@ -3201,7 +3201,7 @@ (define-public libcap
 Linux-based operating systems.")
 
     ;; License is BSD-3 or GPLv2, at the user's choice.
-    (license license:gpl2)))
+    (license (list license:bsd-3 license:gpl2))))
 
 (define-public bridge-utils
   (package
-- 
2.38.1

Message #14 received at 61950 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Antero Mejr <antero <at> mailbox.org>
To: 61950 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Cc: Antero Mejr <antero <at> mailbox.org>
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] gnu: nettle-2: Add lgpl3+ to licenses.
Date: Sat,  4 Mar 2023 04:22:30 +0000

* gnu/packages/nettle.scm (nettle-2)[license]: Add lgpl3+.
---
 gnu/packages/nettle.scm | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/gnu/packages/nettle.scm b/gnu/packages/nettle.scm
index ea26ba3b2d..ee2ea7487e 100644
--- a/gnu/packages/nettle.scm
+++ b/gnu/packages/nettle.scm
@@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ (define-public nettle-2
 fit in easily in almost any context.  It can be easily included in
 cryptographic toolkits for object-oriented languages or in applications
 themselves.")
-    (license gpl2+)))
+    (license (list lgpl3+ gpl2+))))
 
 (define-public nettle
   ;; This version is not API-compatible with version 2.  In particular, lsh
-- 
2.38.1

Message #17 received at 61950 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: Antero Mejr <antero <at> mailbox.org>
Cc: 61950 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#61950] [PATCH] lint: Add 'copyleft' checker.
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2023 16:53:40 +0100

Hello!

Antero Mejr <antero <at> mailbox.org> skribis:

> * guix/lint.scm (check-copyleft, input->package, report-copyleft-violation,
> linking-exception?, copyleft?): New procedures.
> (%local-checkers): Add 'copyleft' checker.
> * tests/lint.scm ("copyleft: incompatible copyleft input"): New tests.
> * doc/guix.texi (Invoking guix lint): Mention it.
> ---
> This new linter checks for copyleft license violations, where a copylefted
> package is linked by a package with an incompatible license.
> It found 2818 incompatible packages.
> For example, GNU readline (GPL) is being linked by 71 permissively
> licensed packages.

I’m skeptical for a couple of reasons:

  1. It’s entirely fine for, say, a BSD-3 package to link against
     Readline (GPLv3+).  The combination is effectively GPLv3+, but
     that’s perfectly valid legally speaking.

  2. It’s tempting to view devise a “licensing calculus” of sorts and
     automate assessments of licensing compatibility.  However, I think
     it’s overestimating both law and our own licensing annotations: how
     law applies in a specific case isn’t entirely clear until one goes
     to court, and our ‘license’ fields fail to represent all the
     relevant nuances anyway (subcomponents having different licenses,
     dual/multiple licensing, etc.).

But really, #1 is the main point here.

WDYT?

Ludo’.

Message #20 received at 61950 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 61950 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Antero Mejr <antero <at> mailbox.org>
Subject: Re: [bug#61950] [PATCH] lint: Add 'copyleft' checker.
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2023 11:45:38 -0500

On Mon, Mar 06, 2023 at 04:53:40PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>   2. It’s tempting to view devise a “licensing calculus” of sorts and
>      automate assessments of licensing compatibility.  However, I think
>      it’s overestimating both law and our own licensing annotations: how
>      law applies in a specific case isn’t entirely clear until one goes
>      to court, and our ‘license’ fields fail to represent all the
>      relevant nuances anyway (subcomponents having different licenses,
>      dual/multiple licensing, etc.).

I emphasize this point. We should not overestimate our understanding of
free / open-source software licensing. The territory is uncharted and
largely untested in the courts.

Message #23 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
To: Antero Mejr via Guix-patches via <guix-patches <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 61950 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, me <at> tobias.gr, Antero Mejr <antero <at> mailbox.org>
Subject: Re: [bug#61950] [PATCH 1/3] gnu: libsndfile: Correct license.
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2023 11:49:16 -0500

On Sat, Mar 04, 2023 at 04:22:28AM +0000, Antero Mejr via Guix-patches via wrote:
> * gnu/packages/pulseaudio.scm (libsndfile)[license]: Change to lgpl2.1+.

Double-checked and pushed as 9c69b322ea85163a2bf9266bffb7edc3dbbc59ab

Thanks!

Message #26 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
To: Antero Mejr via Guix-patches via <guix-patches <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 61950 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, me <at> tobias.gr, Antero Mejr <antero <at> mailbox.org>
Subject: Re: [bug#61950] [PATCH 2/3] gnu: libcap: Add bsd-3 license.
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2023 11:49:35 -0500

On Sat, Mar 04, 2023 at 04:22:29AM +0000, Antero Mejr via Guix-patches via wrote:
> * gnu/packages/linux.scm (libcap)[license]: Add bsd-3.

Double-checked and pushed as e8c25e389dc90b5dc941ba039ccf1e25cacbc6ab

Thanks!

Message #35 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
To: Antero Mejr via Guix-patches via <guix-patches <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 61950 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, me <at> tobias.gr, Antero Mejr <antero <at> mailbox.org>
Subject: Re: [bug#61950] [PATCH 3/3] gnu: nettle-2: Add lgpl3+ to licenses.
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2023 11:50:18 -0500

On Sat, Mar 04, 2023 at 04:22:30AM +0000, Antero Mejr via Guix-patches via wrote:
> * gnu/packages/nettle.scm (nettle-2)[license]: Add lgpl3+.

> -    (license gpl2+)))
> +    (license (list lgpl3+ gpl2+))))

When listing more than one license, please add a code comment explaining
why there are multiple licenses. Can you send a revised patch?

Message #41 received at 61950 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Antero Mejr <antero <at> mailbox.org>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 61950 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Antero Mejr <antero <at> mailbox.org>
Subject: Re: [bug#61950] [PATCH] lint: Add 'copyleft' checker.
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2023 16:21:02 +0000

Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> writes:

>   1. It’s entirely fine for, say, a BSD-3 package to link against
>      Readline (GPLv3+).  The combination is effectively GPLv3+, but
>      that’s perfectly valid legally speaking.

It's fine for FOSS packages, but if you have proprietary-licensed Guix
package where the code can't be open-sourced, bringing in a GPL
dependency is an issue.

This copyleft linter goes along with the other patch where guix lint
exits 1. So you can do something like this in a CI pipeline:

'guix lint -c copyleft my-proprietary-package'

to block developers from adding copyleft dependencies to a non-free package.

>   2. It’s tempting to view devise a “licensing calculus” of sorts and
>      automate assessments of licensing compatibility.  However, I think
>      it’s overestimating both law and our own licensing annotations: how
>      law applies in a specific case isn’t entirely clear until one goes
>      to court, and our ‘license’ fields fail to represent all the
>      relevant nuances anyway (subcomponents having different licenses,
>      dual/multiple licensing, etc.).

True, this linter check is basic and would not constitute legal advice.

It's more of a broad "software license auditing" sort of thing,
to allow engineers to do quick compliance checks. In my experience
it's useful for development in regulated applications of software.

Thanks for the feedback, lmk what you think.

Message #44 received at 61950 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Antero Mejr <antero <at> mailbox.org>
To: 61950 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Cc: Antero Mejr <antero <at> mailbox.org>, me <at> tobias.gr, leo <at> famulari.name
Subject: [PATCH] gnu: nettle-2: Add lgpl3+ to licenses.
Date: Mon,  6 Mar 2023 18:56:03 +0000

* gnu/packages/nettle.scm (nettle-2)[license]: Add lgpl3+.
---
Revised patch with additional license information.

 gnu/packages/nettle.scm | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/gnu/packages/nettle.scm b/gnu/packages/nettle.scm
index ea26ba3b2d..131da1f329 100644
--- a/gnu/packages/nettle.scm
+++ b/gnu/packages/nettle.scm
@@ -77,7 +77,8 @@ (define-public nettle-2
 fit in easily in almost any context.  It can be easily included in
 cryptographic toolkits for object-oriented languages or in applications
 themselves.")
-    (license gpl2+)))
+    (license (list lgpl3+ ;dual licensed, see COPYING.LIB/COPYING.LESSERv3 file
+                   gpl2+)))) ;COPYING, renamed to COPYINGv2 in later versions
 
 (define-public nettle
   ;; This version is not API-compatible with version 2.  In particular, lsh
-- 
2.38.1

Message #47 received at 61950 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
To: Antero Mejr <antero <at> mailbox.org>
Cc: 61950 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, me <at> tobias.gr
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: nettle-2: Add lgpl3+ to licenses.
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2023 16:20:12 -0500

On Mon, Mar 06, 2023 at 06:56:03PM +0000, Antero Mejr wrote:
> -    (license gpl2+)))
> +    (license (list lgpl3+ ;dual licensed, see COPYING.LIB/COPYING.LESSERv3 file
> +                   gpl2+)))) ;COPYING, renamed to COPYINGv2 in later versions

I don't understand the comment.

What is 'COPYING.LIB'? That file doesn't exist in the source code of
nettle 3.7.3.

Are users free to choose a license? Do they apply to different use
cases? Where do the Nettle authors explain the licensing?

Message #50 received at 61950 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: Antero Mejr <antero <at> mailbox.org>
Cc: 61950 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#61950] [PATCH] lint: Add 'copyleft' checker.
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2023 23:38:20 +0100

Antero Mejr <antero <at> mailbox.org> skribis:

> Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> writes:
>
>>   1. It’s entirely fine for, say, a BSD-3 package to link against
>>      Readline (GPLv3+).  The combination is effectively GPLv3+, but
>>      that’s perfectly valid legally speaking.
>
> It's fine for FOSS packages, but if you have proprietary-licensed Guix
> package where the code can't be open-sourced, bringing in a GPL
> dependency is an issue.

Maybe, but it’s not an issue for the Guix project.  :-)

> This copyleft linter goes along with the other patch where guix lint
> exits 1. So you can do something like this in a CI pipeline:
>
> 'guix lint -c copyleft my-proprietary-package'
>
> to block developers from adding copyleft dependencies to a non-free package.

I recommend having this out-of-tree.  If it helps, changing ‘guix lint’
to it can discover new “checkers”, using (guix discovery), might be okay.

>>   2. It’s tempting to view devise a “licensing calculus” of sorts and
>>      automate assessments of licensing compatibility.  However, I think
>>      it’s overestimating both law and our own licensing annotations: how
>>      law applies in a specific case isn’t entirely clear until one goes
>>      to court, and our ‘license’ fields fail to represent all the
>>      relevant nuances anyway (subcomponents having different licenses,
>>      dual/multiple licensing, etc.).
>
> True, this linter check is basic and would not constitute legal advice.
>
> It's more of a broad "software license auditing" sort of thing,
> to allow engineers to do quick compliance checks. In my experience
> it's useful for development in regulated applications of software.
>
> Thanks for the feedback, lmk what you think.

Thanks for explaining.  I think I understand the need now but (1) I
think this need is outside the scope of Guix, and (2) I remain wary of
conclusions drawn from automated ‘license’ field inspection.

I hope that makes sense!

Ludo’.

Message #53 received at 61950 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
To: Antero Mejr <antero <at> mailbox.org>
Cc: 61950 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Re: bug#61950: [PATCH] lint: Add 'copyleft' checker.
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2023 22:48:37 -0400

Hello Antero,

Antero Mejr <antero <at> mailbox.org> writes:

> Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> writes:
>
>>   1. It’s entirely fine for, say, a BSD-3 package to link against
>>      Readline (GPLv3+).  The combination is effectively GPLv3+, but
>>      that’s perfectly valid legally speaking.
>
> It's fine for FOSS packages, but if you have proprietary-licensed Guix
> package where the code can't be open-sourced, bringing in a GPL
> dependency is an issue.
>
> This copyleft linter goes along with the other patch where guix lint
> exits 1. So you can do something like this in a CI pipeline:
>
> 'guix lint -c copyleft my-proprietary-package'
>
> to block developers from adding copyleft dependencies to a non-free package.

I think that goes against the spirit of the GNU project: it's a tool
that helps finding licensing concerns for proprietary software, with the
end goal of weeding out GPL components.  We may be better off if no such
tool exists and more companies embrace the idea that is GPL instead of
helping them spot GPL dependencies so they can rewrite them under some
non-copyleft license.

>>   2. It’s tempting to view devise a “licensing calculus” of sorts and
>>      automate assessments of licensing compatibility.  However, I think
>>      it’s overestimating both law and our own licensing annotations: how
>>      law applies in a specific case isn’t entirely clear until one goes
>>      to court, and our ‘license’ fields fail to represent all the
>>      relevant nuances anyway (subcomponents having different licenses,
>>      dual/multiple licensing, etc.).
>
> True, this linter check is basic and would not constitute legal advice.
>
> It's more of a broad "software license auditing" sort of thing,
> to allow engineers to do quick compliance checks. In my experience
> it's useful for development in regulated applications of software.
>
> Thanks for the feedback, lmk what you think.

I think I'd rather not see this tool in Guix, but I think it could live
happily as a channel or as an extension.

-- 
Thanks,
Maxim

Message #56 received at 61950 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Antero Mejr <antero <at> mailbox.org>
To: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 61950 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Re: bug#61950: [PATCH] lint: Add 'copyleft' checker.
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2023 21:56:20 +0000

Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com> writes:

> I think that goes against the spirit of the GNU project: it's a tool
> that helps finding licensing concerns for proprietary software, with the
> end goal of weeding out GPL components.

I see this completely differently: this is a harm-reduction tool for
those who would violate GPL, possibly unknowingly. By adding compliance
auditing abilities to Guix, developers can avoid that.

> I think I'd rather not see this tool in Guix, but I think it could live
> happily as a channel or as an extension.

Yes I am making this patch (and a couple other compliance features) into
Guix extensions out-of-tree. I would like to upstream the extensions as
a package when they are ready, since the extensions would be FOSS. So I
think this issue can be closed.

> We may be better off if no such
> tool exists and more companies embrace the idea that is GPL instead of
> helping them spot GPL dependencies so they can rewrite them under some
> non-copyleft license.

Making companies rewrite GPL software is a good thing. It forces them to
pay programmers, then those programmers can contribute to Guix in the
evenings :-). Not many people can work on open source full-time,
unfortunately. That said I understand the concerns with merging this
patch, thank you both for taking the time to look at it.

Message #61 received at 61950-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
To: Antero Mejr <antero <at> mailbox.org>
Cc: 61950-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Re: bug#61950: [PATCH] lint: Add 'copyleft' checker.
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2023 22:48:16 -0400

Hey,

Antero Mejr <antero <at> mailbox.org> writes:

[...]

> Making companies rewrite GPL software is a good thing. It forces them to
> pay programmers, then those programmers can contribute to Guix in the
> evenings :-). Not many people can work on open source full-time,
> unfortunately. That said I understand the concerns with merging this
> patch, thank you both for taking the time to look at it.

OK; I'm thus closing this issue, thanks for sharing this endeavor with
us!

-- 
Thanks,
Maxim

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.