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

Re: Fedora Board Recap 2007-JUL-10



Josh Boyer wrote:


Can you explain this a bit more please?  Particularly if you're going to
push it to FESCo.

1) Why do we need to examine code coming from upstream updates?  (E.g.
only to make sure the license tag spells out the correct version?)

I did attend this meeting (last one as a leaving board member). GPLv3 is mutually incompatible with GPLv2. If we pull in updates where the code has been relicensed we would need to check for implications which are rather complex. See http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/

2) What packaging issues need to be discussed with legal?

EULA and collective copyright is under GPLv2 for Fedora currently. Whether that needs to be changed to GPLv3 when we inherit GPL3 licensed software from various upstream projects and a better understanding of interactions between collective copyright and individual programs and trademarked software which are incompatible.

Whether Software that is entirely under the copyright of Red Hat or where Fedora is upstream would move from GPLv2 to GPLv3.

Whether it is worth the effort to separate the license tags in RPM between GPLv2 and GPLv3 licensed software from the legal perspective.

Any other legal things to cross check as a result of a additional GPLv3 license and any new restrictions that it might have introduced to us as a distribution.

Rahul



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