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=468003 --- Comment #19 from Stefan Seefeld <seefeld@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 2008-12-11 13:29:51 EDT --- (In reply to comment #18) > By the way, if you are upstream all I want is that you put the explicit > declaration in the COPYING or README that this software is licensed under > GPL version 2. I'm sorry if I don't follow what you are saying. The COPYING file already starts with GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE Version 2, June 1991 So how could I be more explicit than that ? (And, in the same spirit: What do you exactly mean by "check the license in the technical point of view" ? The cited paragraph clearly says that in case nothing else is available the information (which includes the license version header right on top of COPYING) will be used.) So, right now there are two references: the website, as well as the top of the COPYING file; both agree on the license being GPLv2. What else does it take to convince you ? -- 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. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review