On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 5:25 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > Fedora's Licensing Guidelines don't use the term "effective license" > anywhere. Not even in the section on dual licensing, which is the scenario > where the packager may choose to pick either license for the whole > program. > > There is no such thing as an "effective license" related to the Mixed > Source Licensing Scenario [1], because re-licensing a program, such as > converting from LGPL to GPL, is not done implicitly or automatically. > Thanks but that doesn't answer my question. Are so many people just imagining things? Why does this inconsistency exist? I'd like to have this cleared up so we won't have to discuss the same issue over and over again. Orcan _______________________________________________ Fedora-legal-list mailing list Fedora-legal-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legal-list
