Issue #20397 has been updated by shyouhei (Shyouhei Urabe). Yes, releases do include nkf. But the repo is split. I think nkf's situation shall be cleared for its own sake. LEGAL should no longer be the primary source of truth for that library. ---------------------------------------- Bug #20397: The nkf license in LEGAL file seems to be obsolete https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20397#change-107881 * Author: vo.x (Vit Ondruch) * Status: Open * ruby -v: ruby 3.3.0 (2023-12-25 revision 5124f9ac75) [x86_64-linux] * Backport: 3.0: UNKNOWN, 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN, 3.3: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- The LEGAL file seems to contain [obsolete information](https://github.com/ruby/ruby/blob/a69f0047cb489c136001937442c1d2ffd8ea1dd7/L...) about nkf license. It seems that nkf indeed use such license, but in upstream, it was first changed to [MIT](https://github.com/nurse/nkf/commit/c12280757bfb275d6f9e6b0bf6293a28b060e77b) and then immediately to [zlib](https://github.com/nurse/nkf/commit/2ed3e1c270f1deb9487f7bc7d7586030fe7dabc5) license. Ruby has picked up that change with commit:git|13313688b243882aff7815598ddd9fcbae69bc17 Maybe @naruse can comment about this. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/