Hello fab-list, Below is some discussion about Fedora licensing that took place on fedora-packaging to day, perhaps the board could put it on the meeting agenda? ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Subject: Re: [Fedora-packaging] Licensing guidelines suggestions Date: Monday 06 August 2007 From: "Tom \"spot\" Callaway" <tcallawa@xxxxxxxxxx> To: Discussion of RPM packaging standards and practices for Fedora <fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx> On Mon, 2007-08-06 at 23:05 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote: > Hello, > > Here's a few notes/questions that IMO need to be addressed in the new > licensing guidelines in Wiki. IANAL, etc, but anyway, something for near > future FPC meetings (which I still probably won't be able to attend to for a > couple of weeks): > > 1) The licensing pages strongly imply that OSI-approved licenses are ok. > However for example the original Artistic license is OSI-approved but listed > in Wiki page as "bad". Something needs real fixing - "ask upstream to move > to a "good" Artistic license" is IMO just a band aid. > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing > http://www.opensource.org/licenses/artistic-license.php I think we're going to need the Fedora Board to decide this. Its a little outside of our jurisdiction, unfortunately. _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
