On Wed, 2007-08-22 at 08:52 -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > Even if the Spin Public License is acceptable I don't think we could > include the available codebase as is. What we really really need, is > an upstream release that is already self-consistently licensed with > the spin public license. The tarball I found was not. Yes. First, we need this, then we'll review the license used. Note that the following will prevent it a license from being OK for Fedora: * Use restrictions * Commercial restrictions * Modification restrictions ~spot -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
