I am reviewing package request ghc-failure ( https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630223 ). This is a haskell package. Each haskell package has a cabal file (similar to a Makefile say) that lists, among other things, the license of the sources.
In case of ghc-failure, the license is PublicDomain (as mentioned in the cabal file). I looked at this page http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Good_Licenses and found Public Domain to be a *good* license. There reason for not having the space in the word PublicDomain (based on my assessment) is that the cabal program will not accept a license value with spaces.
Given that the license field in the cabal file is not textually matching the license name that is listed in the webpage, is it ok to go ahead and use "Public Domain" in the spec file? Is it required that the author of the package be contacted to obtain a confirmation on PublicDomain
--
Thanks and Regards
Lakshmi Narasimhan T V
_______________________________________________ legal mailing list legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/legal
