On 4/18/06, Victor Skovorodnikov <vic_sk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Jef, > > Thank you for clarifying. I think that the link you've provided refers to > source code. The source code is mine and I am perfectly willing to provide > whatever (commercial included) license you require. But, do images also > fall into the "Open Source" category? While there is a lot of explanation > of what "Open Source" is, it talks about source code I think, not images. > > Can the images be licensed for non-commercial purposes while the source > code can be for commercial as that article indicates? After all, it is the > code that would form the basis of my package, not the images The package including all its subcomponents must be under acceptable licenses. This is to help stop boobytrapped packages where some sub-component (image, sound file, text) is included that could not be included by a 3rd party wanting to make/sell say "Fedora Core 5 Extras DVD" or similar party. The subcomponent does not even have to be used by the compiled programs.. as its mere presence in the rpm/src.rpm/tar ball/etc could result in problems for any 3rd party. -- Stephen J Smoogen. CSIRT/Linux System Administrator -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
