Question on how to handled "GPL with exceptions" in a package review.

Ralf Corsepius rc040203 at freenet.de
Tue Apr 17 04:17:45 UTC 2007


On Tue, 2007-04-17 at 01:26 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> > Good Morning campers,
> > 
> > I've been working on the review of pigment and I had a question
> > concerning whether I need
> > to ask for a legal review of the license. Its GPL with an additional
> > exception clause. Now personally, I've no problem with the additional
> > clause but I aint no lawyer'n type monkey so take my opinion with a
> > grain of salt.  This is the first time I've come across a GPL with
> > additional exceptions license as a reviewer so I want to tread
> > carefully.
> > 
> > Do additional exceptions tacked on to the GPL require a legal review
> > or is this a best judgement situation?

> Allowing more than what the GPL license would otherwise do is ok.
> For example, a exception to allow a GPL'ed library to link to OpenSSL.

A real world example where the FSF itself applies such a "GPL w/
exceptions" is the license of libstdc++.

> The GPL exception on this pigment review
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=233597 seem ok to me.
ACK.

Ralf





More information about the Fedora-maintainers mailing list