On 19.08.2007 18:35, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On Sun, 2007-08-19 at 18:24 +0200, Marek Mahut wrote: >> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >>> On 19.08.2007 15:52, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > >>> IOW: I think putting a short license text in the spec files (e.g. this >>> is "Public Domain" or "licensed as WTFPL" ) would be a good idea. >> And what happens when I want to import (modified) spec file from other >> project (upstream) licensed under GPLv2 for example? Is that different from the situation we have today already? See below. > This spec clearly is a derived work. As such your spec file will have to > have GPLv2 compatible license. Assuming that's right (¹) then you likely should not take parts of a GPLed spec file even today afaics, as by the CLA you grand Red Hat/the Fedora Project rights on the stuff you submit, which you can't, if the stuff you commit is not yours. Or am I missing something here? CU knurd (¹) -- I'm not a licensing expert, but that might depend on the fact if the part you take is copyrightable or if it's just trivial and not protectable (²) <CLA>You hereby grant to Red Hat, Inc., on behalf of the Project, and to recipients of software distributed by the Project: a perpetual, non-exclusive, worldwide, fully paid-up, royalty free, irrevocable copyright license to reproduce, prepare derivative works of, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute your Contribution and such derivative works;</CLA> -- 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
