[Bug 537431] Review Request: mono-bouncycastle - Bouncy Castle Crypto Package for Mono

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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=537431





--- Comment #6 from Kalev Lember <kalev@xxxxxxxxxxxx>  2009-12-02 14:41:27 EDT ---
Thanks for the review, Thomas!

My main reason for packaging bouncycastle was to get iTextSharp [1] included in
Fedora. However, ASL 1.1 would make those two libraries incompatible. I sent a
mail [2] to bouncycastle csharp development mailing list, asking if it would be
possible to relicense the ASL 1.1 bits under ASL 2.0 instead.

Anyway, this doesn't prevent from completing mono-bouncycastle review.
According to Licensing Guidelines [3], separator between multiple licenses
should be 'and', so I changed the License tag to read 'MIT and ASL 1.1'.

Spec URL: http://kalev.fedorapeople.org/mono-bouncycastle.spec
SRPM URL: http://kalev.fedorapeople.org/mono-bouncycastle-1.5-4.fc13.src.rpm


[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=537437
[2] http://www.bouncycastle.org/csharpdevmailarchive/msg00370.html
[3]
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#Multiple_Licensing_Scenarios

-- 
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

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]