Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484386 --- Comment #12 from D Haley <mycae@xxxxxxxxx> 2009-07-13 20:50:26 EDT --- Just to make sure everyone is on the same page, please read the upstream bug at the gri tracker: http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=105511&aid=2820229&group_id=5511 The developer (Dan) has stated that he is keen to help us, but my interpretation of the situation is that Dan is not certain about the best licence to use to satisfy both Debian and Fedora needs, and what needs to be done once the author has chosen a licence. I would tentatively suggest that GPLv2+ (GPL version 2 or any later) would be the best option, as this allows both debian and fedora to use the author's work, and makes packaging a breeze, if the author wants to relicence. If not, GPLv2 is OK, but this also needs to be listed in the source code boiler-plate, as specified in the how to. Using GPLv2 makes packaging a little bit harder, as we cannot link to GPLv3 code. > This information is down near the end of the GPL text, at "How to > Apply These Terms to Your New Programs". As you say, All that needs to happen is the source files need to comply with the GPL how-to (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-howto.html) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review