Greg Dekoenigsberg wrote:
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007, Margaret Lum wrote:
I'm concerned about the prospect of submitting requests for approval
to import our sanitized components, but being rejected for
non-licensing issues. Technically, I believe we have our ducks in a
row, but the "legal stuff" is where a nebulous cloud currently hangs.
Rex offered to help us out, so I'm going to speak with him. I know
that we need to have our licenses updated to (L)GPL, be package-able
through Koji, have all the necessary mailing lists, groups, ACLs,
remove branded-proprietary code (we came from Netscape/AOL and have
government contracts), adopt the Fedora development process, and
likely exclude signing from our releng process (until there's a
RH-sponsored non-ncipher possibility in the near future). What I'm
wondering is -- what else is there?
Rex will definitely be able to help you along -- but really, I don't
think there is much else. So long as the code is under an approved
license, the RPMs are packaged according to the guidelines, and your
team sticks around to maintain the packages, there really *shouldn't*
be much else. Any legal issues remaining are likely to be inside the
RH fenceline, not in Fedora-land.
--g
Is there someone, in particular, within Red Hat/within Fedora with whom
we should speak about the potential legal issues? (I assume there might
be an offline answer to this..)
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
