On 12/11/2009 04:38 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 16:14:40 +0530, Rahul wrote: > >> On 12/11/2009 03:56 PM, Florian Festi wrote: >>> Without knowing the history: >>> >>> Best solution would be to ask former upstream for permission to continue >>> the project under its original name >> >> That was already denied >> >> https://lists.feep.net:8080/pipermail/libtar/2009-May/000259.html > > Don't call it denial, though, because libtar is licensed under terms > similar to MIT/BSD (with no advertising clause) [1]. This alone gives many > permissions. See the license text for the details. Sure but my comment has nothing to do with the license but the name of the project. > The real reason not to use the "libtar" namespace for a fork are > others. If a upstream developer requests anyone not to use the same name for continuing maintenance of a project, then regardless of the license, it would only be polite not to do so setting aside everything else. Rahul -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
