On Sun, Aug 19, 2007 at 06:35:06PM +0200, 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? > This spec clearly is a derived work. As such your spec file will have to > have GPLv2 compatible license. Well, not only compatible, but it will have to be GPLv2 itself. E.g. you can't take a specfile from a GPL project and license the derived specfile under the compatible BSD license. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpn95Vt8R271.pgp
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
