On Jul 12, 2007, Rahul Sundaram <sundaram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Whether it is worth the effort to separate the license tags in RPM > between GPLv2 and GPLv3 licensed software from the legal perspective. Suggestions to avoid trouble: automate as much checking as possible. New top-of-tree and new builds with License: GPL should be flagged and the maintainer should be asked to replace that with one of GPLv2, GPLv3, GPLv2+, GPLv3+, and perhaps other combinations thereof. Likewise for LGPL. New builds that change licensing terms should check any library dependencies for license incompatibility. E.g., a GPLv2 program must not depend on a GPLv3+ or LGPLv3+ library, and a GPLv3+ program must not depend on a GPLv2 library. (not sure about GPLv3+ / LGPLv2 compatibility, I haven't thought much about it, and IANAL :-) New builds containing libraries should check any dependent packages for license incompatibility similarly. -- Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/ Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org} Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org} _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
