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=532554 --- Comment #3 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> 2010-11-14 10:02:27 EST --- Well, sure, I'm familiar with the license of the works from opsound. The problem is that there seems to be no indication that the stuff came from opsound. g. I guess if you can find it somewhere with an acceptable license then we can use it as that license, but if you follow the URLs (which is the only real indication of where the the files come from) you get licensing information that conflicts. Not to mention that opsound works are cc-by-sa 2.5, not 3.0 as stated in the LICENSE file. So, massively confusing all around; the asterisk guys really seem have trouble with the whole license thing. I honestly don't know what to do; my feeling is that we know we have at least one source that gives us a useful license, and the 2.5/3.0 thing is pretty minor, but I'd still like to see if spot has anything to add. This has been sitting around for over a year so it shouldn't really hurt to wait a bit more so that we're sure we're OK. -- 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