The audioop module uses the code base in g771.c file of the SoX project

Which functions were created from SoX code? All of them? Some of them?

The audioop module uses the code base in g771.c file of the SoX project

Which functions were created from SoX code? All of them? Some of them?

Some of functions,globals variables and array declarations.

I'm not sure if this PR (and the associated issue) is still relevant now that audioop has been deprecated following the acceptance of PEP 594. @brettcannon, what do you think?

@AlexWaygood I'm not a core dev but corporate legal matters is not a joke. They need to be taken seriously to avoid any potential problem from Oracle that now owns all Sun's intellectual property. So in my opinion not only this should be merged, it also should be backported as far as possible.

Associated issue: https://bugs.python.org/issue2716 -> #46968

@VanL does this change look good?

This license does not match the declared license from the source file (GPL, or possible LGPL later). After looking at all the declared tags, they all are consistently under *GPL licenses. So I would not merge this:
-The license looks incorrect

• Given the apparent license, it would significantly affect the licensing of Python overall

Update: I see the link to sourcearchive on bpo, but I can't verify the license because that is now down. The sourcearchive license would be compatible with Python's licensing, but the link to sourceforge (which the new patch references) declares this to be under the GPL.

If you can update this to use the source from https://web.archive.org/web/19970716121258/http://www.spies.com/Sox/Archive/soxgamma.tar.gz, that has a license that could be compatible (with appropriate copying of all copyright information), but I would not merge this as-is. In fact, I would suggest pulling out this module/rewriting this bit.

A Python core developer has requested some changes be made to your pull request before we can consider merging it. If you could please address their requests along with any other requests in other reviews from core developers that would be appreciated.

Once you have made the requested changes, please leave a comment on this pull request containing the phrase I have made the requested changes; please review again. I will then notify any core developers who have left a review that you're ready for them to take another look at this pull request.

Triggering CLA.

A

This license does not match the declared license from the source file (GPL, or possible LGPL later). After looking at all the declared tags, they all are consistently under *GPL licenses. So I would not merge this: -The license looks incorrect

* Given the apparent license, it would significantly affect the licensing of Python overall

Update: I see the link to sourcearchive on bpo, but I can't verify the license because that is now down. The sourcearchive license would be compatible with Python's licensing, but the link to sourceforge (which the new patch references) declares this to be under the GPL.

If you can update this to use the source from https://web.archive.org/web/19970716121258/http://www.spies.com/Sox/Archive/soxgamma.tar.gz, that has a license that could be compatible (with appropriate copying of all copyright information), but I would not merge this as-is. In fact, I would suggest pulling out this module/rewriting this bit.

@VanL @brettcannon I have added the license in the source you mentioned.

Thanks @furkanonder for the PR, and @brettcannon for merging it 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.10, 3.11.
🐍🍒⛏🤖

GH-98531 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.11 branch.

GH-98532 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.10 branch.