Re: [Fedora-r-devel-list] License

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

 



On 04/01/2009 05:05 AM, Pierre-Yves wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
> I am having a small question/problem for the review [1].
> Upstream updated the sources [2]-[3] which now mention in the
> description file:
> --------------------------
> License: Artistic-2.0
> ExtraLicenses: The following files in the 'src' directory are licensed
> for all
>   use by Jim Kent, in a manner compatible with the Artistic 2.0 license:
>   common.c/h, memalloc.c/h, localmem.c/h, hash.c/h, errabort.c/h,
> rbTree.c/h,
>   dlist.c/h, errCatch.h 
> ----------------------------
> 
> How should I mention that in the spec file ?
> Should I keep Artistic 2.0 ?

Those files have an extremely permissive license on them. If that
license was the only license in the package, we would use "Copyright
only" to reflect that. I'd recommend changing the tag to:

License: Artistic 2.0 and Copyright only

~spot

_______________________________________________
Fedora-r-devel-list mailing list
Fedora-r-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-r-devel-list

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

  Powered by Linux