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=524386 --- Comment #9 from kashyap chamarthy <kchamart@xxxxxxxxxx> 2009-09-29 10:37:20 EDT --- (In reply to comment #8) > The licensing on this package is at issue. None of the source files give any > license attribution, nor do any of the documentation files. > > The presence of "COPYING" is the only clue at licensing, so you should contact > upstream and ask them to clarify what license they intend for this code to > have. On this, I already contacted upstream and suggested to add appropriate license block in all source files - and a new tar ball(1.4.3) was released /with/ appropriate licenses. Will respin with an updated SPEC and SRPM > > On its own, all we can assume from COPYING's presence is "GPL+". > > In addition, one file has something rather worrysome: > > [sender.c]: > > /* The procedure was found on the Internet - unknown license status!!! */ > static inline uint16_t sender_cksum(uint16_t * addr, size_t cnt, uint16_t * > pseudo, size_t pseudosz) > { > > I'm pretty sure that procedure came from here: > http://aluigi.altervista.org/papers/gsmsdisc.zip > > http://aluigi.org/about.htm#howuse describes Luigi's licensing, which is > effectively "Copyright Only". > > You should confirm this with upstream and have them give proper attribution to > Luigi Auriemma, along with a link to his website describing the licensing > terms. sure, will confirm with upstream on this. thanks a lot for comments Tom. -- 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