[Bug 248277] Review Request: mt-daapd - An iTunes-compatible media server

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: mt-daapd - An iTunes-compatible media server


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=248277





------- Additional Comments From sergio.pasra at gmail.com  2007-12-19 14:07 EST -------
(In reply to comment #18)
> (In reply to comment #17)
> > (In reply to comment #16)
> > > In reference to comment #14, I received a reply from the author and he
> > > recommended using the avahi code as well. I have three questions:
> > > 
> > > 1. Is it legally okay to ship an SRPM with license issues (a la
> > > GPLv2 + Apache) if the corresponding code is disabled at compile
> > > time?
> > 
> > I don't have a reference handy, but I think that the answer is no.
> 
> Actually after thinking about this some more, I think that the answer
> may be yes.  Since the Apple license is free enough to qualify for
> Fedora, we can ship the code.  What's prohibited is combining the
> Apple licensed code with GPL licensed code.  Since we can do that by
> choosing our configure options properly I think that we're ok.  The
> Asterisk situation was different in that some of the code in Asterisk
> had a license that prohibited Fedora from shipping it.
> 
> It'd still be good to ping Tom Callaway about this since he deals with
> this stuff more often.  It'd be even better for upstream to get the
> licensing figured out properly.
> 

Probably the best is to ask in fedora-legal-list at redhat.com

There are some guidelines about packaging software with offending licenses here: 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/SourceUrl





-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.