Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rubygems - the Ruby standard for packaging ruby libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220683 ------- Additional Comments From dlutter@xxxxxxxxxx 2007-01-05 20:34 EST ------- (In reply to comment #5) > Correct... my concern isn't that the license text isn't included, it's that > there is nothing at all in the package referring to what the license _is_. > Everything says 'see LICENSE.txt'. > > Not to say that it would happen, but they could ship a LICENSE.txt in the next > release that was not acceptable for extras, and say 'Thats what we always meant". Ok, now I understand the concern; the actual LICENSE.txt file is in their subversion repo [1] and starts by saying <quote> RubyGems is copyrighted free software by Chad Fowler, Rich Kilmer, Jim Weirich and others. You can redistribute it and/or modify it under either the terms of the GPL (see COPYING.txt file), or the conditions below: ... </quote> Does that address the concerns around the official license ? [1] http://rubyforge.org/viewvc/trunk/LICENSE.txt?revision=1060&root=rubygems&view=markup -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review