On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 7:27 PM, Richard Fontana wrote:
No, it shouldn't be seen as plain GPL. I'd say this is a free software
license but is sufficiently more restrictive than conventional
interpretations of GPLv2 to the point of being GPL-incompatible, and
indeed the authors seem to acknowledge this. It should have a distinct
license tag.
Rahul
_______________________________________________ legal mailing list legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/legal
