Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: libmodelfile - library for accessing WorldForge model files Alias: libmodelfile https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198830 ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-20 21:15 EST ------- (In reply to comment #8) > In the review for libmodelfile > (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198830), you > mention that the package's license conflicts with the included GPL license. > > The upstream author is willing to make the necessary changes, but has > asked for clarification via bugzilla because he (nor I) are able to see > exactly where the conflict arises. Ralf, you mention that section 2 of > the source file licenses conflict with the GPL, but when I read section > 2a of the GPL, I don't see this as a conflict. > > I see your point, I guess they are compatible then Ralf, do you agree? Well, the author's sources apply a license which is not the GPL. He licenses them under a different license model => His sources are not GPL'ed. Judging if his work can be shipped under a "GPL umbrella" probably would require a lawyer. As I originally said, I see a potential incompatibility between the GPL and paragraph 2 of his license: "2. Altered source versions must be plainly marked as such, and must not be misrepresented as being the original software." -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
