https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1298665 --- Comment #19 from Neil Horman <nhorman@xxxxxxxxxx> --- alex, I appreciate you looking into it, but I don't believe that the legal dual licensing is going to be acceptable for fedora packaging (or Red Hat for that matter). I'm going to ask Red Hat Legal to clarify this but it seems to me that, while dual licensing is certainly a legal approach to take to open source code, both licenses must be open source compatible for us to pacakge the code in Fedora or RHEL. That is to say, you may have a package that contains both BSD and GPLv2 licensed code, and thats fine, as long as you clearly delineate which code is licensed in which way. However, you have a dual license situation in which code may be licensed under GPLv2 or some proprietary license. While the former is ok, the latter is not distributable, and you have several files in here that are very ambiguous, as they do not specify which license they are under. If they are all 100% GPLv2 licensed, then thats great, but its not a dual license situation then, its a single license, and the proprietary language needs to be removed. If there proprietary code here, then thats a problem of a different sort. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. 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