GPL and LGPL not acceptable for Fedora!
Hans de Goede
j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl
Thu Aug 16 05:31:36 UTC 2007
Kelly wrote:
> On Thursday, August 16, 2007 1:11:20 am Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> So if sourcecode doesn't mention a version but COPYING does, it's still
>> interpreted as "or any later version?" Hm... that strikes me as odd.
>
> I BELIEVE what they're trying to say is that if both the source and COPYING
> contain different licence numbers, the source trumps the COPYING file.
>
> Most of the time, the COPYING file is simply the GPL/LGPL copied verbatim from
> the FSF site. As a result, I can understand why they would say look at the
> source code.
>
> However, I'd suspect in that case, the stuff in the COPYING is what counts. I
> BELIEVE that the point of the "check the source" rule is to avoid situations
> where the COPYING file conflicts with the source itself.
>
<sigh>, fine don't believe me I've only license audited 148 packages sofar, so
I probably don't know what I'm doing. But if you don't believe me then atleast
RTFM, quoting: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing
"A GPL or LGPL licensed package that lacks any statement of what version that
it's licensed under in the source code/program output/accompanying docs is
technically licensed under *any* version of the GPL or LGPL, not just the
version in whatever COPYING file they include."
Regards,
Hans
More information about the fedora-devel-list
mailing list