colamd.c has an incorrect mention of LGPL license

[rgommers]

We received a SciPy bug report about colamd.c in the vendored SuperLU code claiming that the code is under the LGPL license: scipy/scipy#21234. The problematic mention is at:

superlu/SRC/colamd.c

Line 84 in 6f7ea89

terms of the GNU LGPL, provided that the Copyright, this License,

The code isn't actually LGPL-licensed; the BSD license mention at the top of the same file is correct, as discussed in more detail in the linked SciPy issue. The LGPL mention is still problematic, since there are now two conflicting licenses mentioned in the same file, and the LGPL mention is going to trigger extra work for Linux distro packagers and anyone else who uses license checkers to carefully analyze code for license compliance.

This problem was introduced in commit 44f2c5e. The right fix I believe is to remove the offending bit of code comment that contains "LGPL". I'd be happy to open a PR for that if that helps.

[gruenich]

I think you are right. Tim Davis' colamd is licensed under BSD-3.

Please provide a PR as this increases the changes to get this fixed.

[hawkinsp]

I think this wasn't an accident: the license was LGPL but it was changed at this commit; see COLAMD/Doc/License.txt

DrTimothyAldenDavis/SuiteSparse@75753f9#diff-63df1cd034960b4145afd34464072e6a66d38c76cc530659bc2f85d0695413f0

#149 updates to v4.5.6, which is the first commit after it was relicensed to BSD.