On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 07:47:59AM -0600, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Tue, 2006-12-19 at 19:09 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > Patrice Dumas wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 10:12:51PM -0600, Jeffrey C. Ollie wrote: > > >> http://trac.mcs.anl.gov/projects/bcfg2/browser/trunk/bcfg2/LICENSE > > >> > > >> Free enough for extras? > > > > > > No, because of the advertisement clause: > > > > > > "4. All advertising materials, journal articles and documentation > > > mentioning features derived from or use of the Software must display > > > the following acknowledgment:" > > > > > > This is a restriction on use which renders it non free. Also it may be > > > hard to follow this rule since it is not very precise, since 'mentionning > > > features derived from or use' maybe understood more or less broadly. > > > > Dont we allow the 4-clause BSD license in Fedora? > > Annoyingly, yes. It's on the list of GPL-Incompatible, Free Software > Licenses. Which we are about to dump, or not? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FreeSoftwareAnalysis -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpg9I7FsCTom.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
