https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1438673 --- Comment #43 from jiri vanek <jvanek@xxxxxxxxxx> --- > > I have not looked into any of the license issues, it would be great if other > have time to help me. I did. Whole fx project should really be GPL2: Thanx to Mario for pointing out http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/10/rt/file/48902e8e83a9/LICENSE On other side, it claims to have same license as openjdk; http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/java-1.8.0-openjdk.git/tree/java-1.8.0-openjdk.spec#n811 That is a bit contradiction, so maybe I have bad license in jdk package. Your statement of: License: GPL v2 with exceptions and BSD and LGPL v2+ and (LGPL v2+ or BSD) seems to be reflecting major of what review tool is saying. Hoowever I would go with simple GPL-2 with Classpath exception (/me a bit afraid of BSD in license field) The incorrect-fsf-address is actually patch for upstream, so we do not need to bother with it rigt now. I will try to find some lawyer around, but with "GPL-2 with Classpath exception" I think we are ok to go. -- 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
