GPL and LGPL not acceptable for Fedora!
Harald Hoyer
harald at redhat.com
Fri Aug 17 11:44:05 UTC 2007
Harald Hoyer schrieb:
> Colin Walters schrieb:
>> However, I was fairly sure there had to already be something open
>> source out there to use as a start. My initial googling wasn't too
>> successful (a lot of things called licenses), but then I had the
>> bright idea to add "Debian" to my search. Turns out there's a license
>> analyzing script in
> ...
> s.th. like the attached perl script might be a start..
> is there a public fedora cvs where I can check that in, so that it can
> be extended?
> btw, I'm not perl guru, don't expect nice code..
ok, with the attached perl script, I quickly spotted for my packages:
initscripts:
Found Licenses: GPLv2, GPL (no version mentioned), GPLv2+
What makes that? GPLv2 ??
cdrkit:
Found Licenses: LGPLv2+, GPLv2, GPL (no version mentioned), LGPLv2.1+, GPLv2+,
What makes that? GPLv2 ??
nmap:
Found Licenses: LGPLv2+, BSD (no advertise clause), GPLv2, BSD (with advertise clause, not GPL conform), GPLv2+
uhh, bad one...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: checklicense.pl
Type: application/x-perl
Size: 8702 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/attachments/20070817/0700a877/attachment.pl>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3623 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/attachments/20070817/0700a877/attachment.bin>
More information about the Fedora-maintainers
mailing list