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

Re: GPL and LGPL not acceptable for Fedora!



seth vidal wrote:
On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 23:01 -0400, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
Got your attention? Good.

GPL and LGPL are NOT acceptable License tags for Fedora. You cannot
simply use "GPL" or "LGPL" as a license tag anymore.

You have to use one of the following tags:

GPL+, GPLv2, GPLv2+, GPLv3, GPLv3+, LGPLv2, LGPLv2+, LGPLv3, LGPLv3+


seahorse contains both GPLv2+ and LGPLv2+ components

should I have it labeled as both?


That depends, do any of the build binaries contain only LGPLv2+ parts? If not, then the GPL trumps the LGPL and the license tag should be just:
License: GPLv2+

If there are binaries which are build from LGPL code only, and these are in the same rpm, then it would be:
License: GPLv2+ and LGPLv2+

However, assuming that the LGPL licensed stuff is a lib, which not only gets used during building, but also installed under /usr/lib[64], then please concider doing a -libs subpackage and use "License: GPL+" for the main package and "License: LGPLv2+" for the -libss and -devel sub-packages. The idea behind this tags is that interpackage licensing issues can be checked by a script, using:
License: GPLv2+ and LGPLv2+
Is not going to help this script, resulting in people still needing to check things manually.

Regards,

Hans (Who has 2 packages of his 150 left todo and then the License tagging operation is completed for me).


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