[Fedora-packaging] Is this license okay for a fedora package?

Simo Sorce ssorce at redhat.com
Wed Mar 28 20:50:48 UTC 2007

On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 15:09 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> >>>>> "JW" == Jarod Wilson <jwilson at redhat.com> writes:
> JW> I'd like to package up Maia Mailguard, and the license appears to
> JW> be original BSD (advertising clause included) with a branding
> JW> extension added. Thoughts?
> In a way it's sort of like the GFDL with its invariant section.  I
> personally think that kind of thing renders the software "non-free",
> but I'm not a lawyer.

Not sure if that license is free, to me it stinks, but in any case the
GFDL is a Documentation License, not a Software License, let's keep
apples to apples comparisons, and let's try to not get infected by the
Debian disease about defining what is software.


More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list