Re: Missing license header for ASL 2.0 project

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 02:16:38PM -0000, Jonny Heggheim wrote:
> Hi, license headers for python-libnacl[1] was missing, so I asked upstream if they could confirm that all files were under ASL[2].
> 
> Upstream reply was:
> > Yes, as stated in clause 5 of the Apache license all files contributed to this project inherit the Apache Licence unless explicitly stated otherwise.
> 
> Do we need to get confirmation from upstream when license is ASL 2.0? 

No (if I understand your question rightly) -- Fedora doesn't have any
general requirement that all source files in a given package have
license notices, regardless of what the license is.

Richard

> [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1399833#c3
> [2] https://github.com/saltstack/libnacl/issues/86
_______________________________________________
legal mailing list -- legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to legal-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite News]     [Gnome Users]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux