Re: Fedora websites and licensing

[Toshio Kuratomi <a badger gmail com>]

Karsten 'quaid' Wade wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-05-22 at 15:10 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > IIRC, part of the question was what license the "code" involved in the 
> > website fell under.  That is does the css and templates for the websites 
> > also fall under the OPL?
>
> Exactly the point of this thread.  The *content* is under the OPL.  The
> markup around just the content is probably covered by that OPL.  But the
> rest of the site (CSS, Python, TurboGears, HTML, etc.) has not been
> licensed.  It is, however, a contribution, so is covered at a minimum by
> the CLA.
TurboGears apps are all licensed although not all of them have the 
license information in all the source files:

Source Headers:
  GPLv2:
    FAS2
    PackageDB
    Bodhi
  GPLv2+:
    smolt: client

One License File for the Project:
  MIT/X11:
    Mirrormanager[1]_
  GPL+:
    smolt: smoon (server)[2]_
    Transifex

[1]_: Helper script under GPLv2
[2]_: smolt client and server are hosted together in the same tarball 
and repository so the fact that the client has a header explicitly 
listing GPLv2+ might make the server GPLv2+ as well.  The smolt authors 
would probably be willing to clarify this in any case.

-Toshio