https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458974 Tom "spot" Callaway <tcallawa@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks|182235 (FE-Legal) | --- Comment #34 from Tom "spot" Callaway <tcallawa@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to John Morris from comment #32) > The license is LGPLv2.1, with a special exception [1]. Setting blocks > FE_LEGAL to double-check the License: tag. (Please see below, and comment > 25 above.) > > Since the OCCT license is unacceptable to Fedora, does the exception have > any additional meaning as far as what software it may be combined with, or > should this software simply be treated as LGPLv2.1 as far as Fedora > packaging is concerned? Should the License: tag read just "LGPLv2" or > "LGPLv2 with exceptions"? LGPLv2 with exceptions. This exception is the old QT exception wording from when they were LGPLv2. > There is a promising project to create a CAM module for FreeCAD. They are > considering combining some GPLv3 libraries. Doing so would violate this > software license, correct? No, because LGPLv2 permits conversion to GPLv2+. Lifting FE-Legal. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=182235 [Bug 182235] Fedora Legal Tracker -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review