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=530230 Steve Traylen <steve.traylen@xxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|CANTFIX | --- Comment #13 from Steve Traylen <steve.traylen@xxxxxxx> 2010-01-12 18:03:20 EST --- Tom, thanks awfully for following this up. Pleased and impressed it is resolved. I would be interested in the kind of clause that is needed for htop. In particular the whole motivation for plpa was to then add on to the GPLv2 licensed SLURM. https://computing.llnl.gov/linux/slurm/slurm.html Jussi, here are new amended packages now not blocked by a legal situation. Version 1.3.2 and licensed as BSD and AMDPLPA. http://cern.ch/straylen/rpms/plpa/plpa-1.3.2-1.fc12.src.rpm http://cern.ch/straylen/rpms/plpa/plpa.spec -- 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. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review