Bug 33680

Summary: THIRDPARTYLICENSEREADME.html / LICENSE.odt
Product: LibreOffice Reporter: Andras Timar <timar74>
Component: LibreOfficeAssignee: Not Assigned <libreoffice-bugs>
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE    
Severity: normal    
Priority: medium    
Version: 3.3.0 release   
Hardware: Other   
OS: All   
Whiteboard:
Crash report or crash signature: Regression By:

Description Andras Timar 2011-01-29 01:56:09 UTC 
There are several issues with THIRDPARTYLICENSEREADME.html and LICENSE.odt.

1. Inaccurate information

   E.g.: The following software may be included in this product: *Polish* hyphenation dictionary; Use of any of this software is governed by the terms of the license below: Bence Nagy *Hungarian* hyphenation dictionary

2. Missing information

   E.g.: No licence info for Hungarian thesaurus, Linux Libertine G font, etc.

3. Duplicated information

   E.g.: License of Bitstream Vera appears twice.

4. Obsolete information

   E.g.: Generic Polygon Clipper (GPC) and Charis SIL Fonts are not used in LibreOffice.

5. Formatting is ugly.


Possible solution: review the contents and make a new layout with table of contents and unified formatting. 

* Preamble
* Libraries
  - all libs from libs-extern and libs-extern-sys
* Spellchecking dictionaries
  - from libs-extern-sys/dictionaries
* Hyphenation patterns
  - from libs-extern-sys/dictionaries
* Thesauri
  - from libs-extern-sys/dictionaries
* Fonts
  - from libs-extern-sys/more_fonts
* Artwork
  - e.g. KDE icons, OxygenOffice templates and gallery items, etc.
* Appendices (licenses)
  - LGPLv2.1
  - LGPLv3
  - GPLv2
  - GPLv3
  - MPL 1.0
  - MPL 1.1
  - etc... 


(I can take this bug, if nobody has objections. Target: LibreOffice 3.4)
Comment 1 Jaxson Lee 2011-02-03 02:17:59 UTC 
Agree with you on all five counts. The formatting style of body text introduction, followed by company name in Header 2 style, then the product name in H3 makes it particularly hard to follow. Conventionally, it should be product name as main header, followed by company name, followed by the "this software may be used in this product" introduction.

Also, shouldn't the components licensed under GPL/LGPL still have a copyright notice, as well as a link to the main licence text? (Usually you'll see "Copyright (C) <year>  <name of author> This library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public License...")
Comment 2 Andras Timar 2011-05-21 10:43:59 UTC 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 37001 ***
Comment 3 measrasy 2024-02-15 02:25:56 UTC Comment hidden (spam)