[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Fedora Board Recap 2007-JUL-10

On Fri, 2007-07-13 at 07:20 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Josh Boyer wrote:
> > 
> > Can you explain this a bit more please?  Particularly if you're going to
> > push it to FESCo.
> > 
> > 1) Why do we need to examine code coming from upstream updates?  (E.g.
> > only to make sure the license tag spells out the correct version?)
> I did attend this meeting (last one as a leaving board member). GPLv3 is 
> mutually incompatible with GPLv2. If we pull in updates where the code 
> has been relicensed we would need to check for implications which are 
> rather complex. See http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/

Hm, ok.  Should that be part of the review steps now?

> > 2) What packaging issues need to be discussed with legal?
> EULA and collective copyright is under GPLv2 for Fedora currently. 

Not packaging issues.

> Whether Software that is entirely under the copyright of Red Hat or 
> where Fedora is upstream would move from GPLv2 to GPLv3.

Not packaging issues.

> Whether it is worth the effort to separate the license tags in RPM 
> between GPLv2 and GPLv3 licensed software from the legal perspective.


> Any other legal things to cross check as a result of a additional GPLv3 
> license and any new restrictions that it might have introduced to us as 
> a distribution.

This is what I'm asking about.  Sounds like it's still in the
investigatory stage.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]