[cc += fedora-devel@] Benj. Mako Hill wrote: > <quote who="Simon Schampijer" date="Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 01:06:19PM +0100"> >> we did show a full license in the Control Panel before. The path was >> hard coded to where OLPC had placed the GPL license. What can we do to >> meet the expectations of all the distributions that want to ship sugar? > > It would be a great thing if we got the major distributions to agree on > a place to put common licenses. Debian puts them in > '/usr/share/common-licenses'. I don't know where Red Hat puts them. RedHat does not optimize common licenses at all. Each package bears a copy of its own license, which is typically installed in /usr/share/doc/<pkgname>/COPYING or similar. > If we got agreement in those two places and on a list of common licenses > (even if one group just decides to symlink), we could get a majority of > distributions once the changes propogate. Seems like a great idea to me... But I think it already came up some time ago, and I vaguely remember that RH legal blocked it because the license itself -- not just a symlink to it -- had to accompany the package. -- // Bernie Innocenti - http://www.codewiz.org/ \X/ Sugar Labs - http://www.sugarlabs.org/ -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
