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

Re: GPL and LGPL not acceptable for Fedora!

On Thu, 2007-08-16 at 10:59 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-08-16 at 10:43 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:34:48 +0200
> > Till Maas <opensource till name> wrote:
> > 
> > > What if the code only says "see COPYING ", is it then ok to use the
> > > version information from COPYING?
> > 
> > I do believe that counts as documentation, and since unmodified COPYING
> > is basically GPL+ that would be your license.
> While this is strictly true I think the best action is to ask upstream
> to resolve the issue by explicitly stating their choice in a document.
> /me imagines an angry author shouting at C violation by Fedora because
> we mark something GPL+ instead of GPLv2+ or GPLv3+

Agreed. Asking upstream is the best way to resolve that case.

However, we're not liable for any mistaken tagging of the License in our
package, because the License: tag isn't legally binding.


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