https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1362490 --- Comment #28 from Jeroen van Meeuwen <vanmeeuwen+fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Jared Smith from comment #26) > (In reply to Tim Flink from comment #25) > > > MIT/X11 (BSD like) > > > ------------------ > > > libphutil-8f8e02d47569dce5f035383d8bcbf7a08481e839/externals/jsonlint/LICENSE > > > > Why couldn't this be distributed as APL2? Ignoring the GPL3 issue with the > > bison output, I mean. > > Because it's not licensed under the APL2 license. It's licensed under an > MIT-like license. You're not the copyright holder, so you can't change the > license on the software. We should be able to remove the corresponding directory /usr/share/libphutil/externals/jsonlint/ from the installed RPM, would the license still be a concern per the contents of the source tarball? (In reply to Tim Flink from comment #25) > (In reply to Jared Smith from comment #24) > > You're going to need to adjust the license tag on this package. > > Licensecheck found several licenses other than Apache in parts of the code > > base: > > > > GPL (v3 or later) > > ----------------- > > libphutil-8f8e02d47569dce5f035383d8bcbf7a08481e839/support/xhpast/parser. > > yacc.cpp > > libphutil-8f8e02d47569dce5f035383d8bcbf7a08481e839/support/xhpast/parser. > > yacc.hpp > > Bah, I thought those were covered under the special GPL exception for bison > output but I missed the part about "as long as it isn't used as part of a > parser generator'. > We don't really ship support/, and so effectively it isn't used (let alone as part of a parser generator). This makes this result in the same question as above -- source tarball license(s) or shipped content? -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx