* Ralf Corsépius: > Am 31.07.22 um 18:57 schrieb Richard Fontana: >> There are so few non-legacy, today-commonly-used, >> generally-accepted-as-FOSS licenses that are not viewed as >> GPLv3-compatible that I think it might be better for Ansible to just >> list those (the only one I can think of is EPL-2.0), or to list a >> small set of recommended/acceptable commonly-used FOSS licenses. > I do not agree with this view and consider this decision not to be helpful. > > These licenses might not be "commonly used", but if they are used, > these are the controversal ones, that need to be looked into, exactly > because they "not commonly used". But there's the general license review process for that, and that's not going to go away? It's just that claims regarding GPLv2 or GPLv3 compatibility are no longer an expected deliverable of the review process. Thanks, Florian _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
