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=730232 Richard Fontana <rfontana@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks|182235(FE-Legal) | --- Comment #5 from Richard Fontana <rfontana@xxxxxxxxxx> 2012-03-09 00:47:23 EST --- (In reply to comment #1) > According to the license headers this is not LGPLv2+ but every file is mix of > GPLv2(only) and ASL 2.0 which are known to be incompatible. I would wait for > legal but according to me this cannot go into Fedora. While this is certainly odd, I see various ways of conceptually resolving any supposed license incompatibility. The easiest may be to assume that all code is CDDL. It is significant that the nominal copyright holder clearly saw no problem with incorporating Apache License 2.0 code into files licensed under CDDL/GPLv2. Lifting FE-Legal. Marek, the only real issue here is that the License tag should be changed from "LGPLv2+" to "CDDL". -- 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