On Wed, 2008-03-12 at 20:55 +0200, Gabor Szabo wrote: > So if you do find a module with problematic licenses it would be great > if you could check if CPANTS http://cpants.perl.org/ has also caught > that issue. To be brutally honest, Artistic 1.0 is a problematic license. It's been poorly interpreted in US court (1), and is not a free license (says the FSF, who gets to decide what is free). We're going through the process of trying to contact upstream copyright holders for code that is marked as "Artistic 1.0 only" (same license as perl is fine, since we can just choose GPL+), in the attempt to get them to relicense or dual license. Most of the offenders here are perl modules. It is my plan to pull all of the Artistic 1.0 code out of rawhide in Fedora 10. ~spot 1: http://lawandlifesiliconvalley.blogspot.com/2007/08/new-open-source-legal-decision-jacobsen.html -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl Fedora-perl-devel-list mailing list Fedora-perl-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-perl-devel-list
