On 12/11/2007, Tom spot Callaway <tcallawa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The "disparaging Sun" license is gone, but the "nuclear" clause is still > there in some of the classes. > > To reiterate what I said before: > > This is a use-case restriction: > "You acknowledge that Software is not designed,licensed or intended for > use in the design, construction, operation or maintenance of any nuclear > facility." > > The word "licensed" is the problem here. Acknowledging that the software > isn't designed or intended for any particular use case is fine, but when > you say that the "software is not licensed for use...", then you're > making a use case restriction. > > This is still no-go for Fedora, sorry. I contacted upstream, but the relicensing the relevant files is not a possibility for them, alas (they're not the original copyright holders - Sun is). As an aside, I wonder if distributing itext under the LGPL while including those files licensed with the nuclear clause is not a contradiction and invalid. Jonathan. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
