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

[Fedora-legal-list] OpenCascade Public License again



Hi Spot,

you will probably remember that you were checking the OpenCascade Public
License few moth ago. Now the question about its free/nonfree status was
opened on the upstream forum and it would be a good chance to express
our (or better RH Legal's) reasons that led to the decision that it is
non-free and possibly make upstream to resolve them.

I am including the mail I got from Debian packagers.

URL of the discussion is
http://www.opencascade.org/org/forum/thread_15859/

related Review Request is
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458974


		Dan

--- Begin Message ---
On 2008/8/13 Adam C Powell IV wrote:
[...]
> Second and more importantly, Dan Horák tells me that RedHat has referred
> the OCTPL to their legal team for consideration as a free license,
> toward inclusion in Fedora.  In my opinion, it's QPL-ish, and should be
> considered free.  But RedHat legal carries a lot more weight than I do,
> so I'd like to wait until they've rendered an opinion, hopefully
> positive, and include that in the copyright file.  If they come back
> negative, then oh well, I'd try Debian contrib anyway but would probably
> have to settle for non-free.
[...]

Hi all, I raised some license issues at
http://www.opencascade.org/org/forum/thread_15859/

Dan, maybe you could explain in this forum what needs to be done to
have an OpenCascade
package in Fedora?  If you do not know who is Roman Lygin, he gave
some details about
himself on his first blog post, see his signature.
In my opinion, this is a good opportunity to solve those licensing issues.

Denis


--- End Message ---

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