[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [fab] Re: Licensing audit for Fedora Extras

On Tue, 2006-12-05 at 16:44 -0600, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-12-05 at 12:18 -0800, Karsten Wade wrote:
> > 
> > For all packages that i) Fedora is the upstream[1] and ii) provide
> > content in /usr/share/doc, we need to ensure that:
> > 
> > a. The content is licensed under the OPL only, and
> > b. The OPL is used without restrictions
> Um... why?

Because the only open source license Fedora uses for
content/documentation is the OPL without options.


When we did the relicensing earlier this year, we forgot to check
packages where we are the upstream.

- Karsten
Karsten Wade, RHCE, 108 Editor    ^     Fedora Documentation Project 
 Sr. Developer Relations Mgr.     |  fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject
   quaid.108.redhat.com           |          gpg key: AD0E0C41
////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]