Re: GPL and LGPL not acceptable for Fedora!

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

 



On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 17:19:36 +0200
Tomas Janousek <tjanouse@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> What I'm trying to say is that if The Program does not mention what
> license it is being licensed in *at all*, does it really mean it's
> GPL?

Only if the COPYING file unmodified exists along side it.  If there is
no mention of license, and there is no COPYING file, or no other such
documentation that would give a hint as to what the license of the
software is, it would be unlicensed, and we should stay away from it
until the author(s) apply some sort of license.  We can helpfully
suggest a few, like the wtfpl...

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

--
Fedora-maintainers mailing list
Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers
--
Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list
Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Development]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux