On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 2:19 PM Richard Fontana <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> The issue here (at least the only one I'm aware of) was that the
> package contains WSDL files that are nominally under a license that
> does not meet Fedora's policy on acceptable licenses.
>
> The default conclusion here should be that the package is not
> acceptable for Fedora. However, if you or anyone else would like to
> provide an explanation of how these files are used in this package,
> that might support a different conclusion. I do not really have the
> bandwidth to look into this myself.
>
Arguably, this file is content, not code. In that case, it should be
acceptable under the "content licenses may restrict modification"
exception:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main#Good_Licenses_3

CC BY-ND is acceptable under that same policy. The only restriction
imposed by the notice in the files the prohibition against
modifcation:

> Recipients of this document may copy, distribute, publish, or display this 
> document so long as this copyright notice, license and disclaimer are 
> retained with all copies of the document. No license is granted to modify 
> this document.

So the main question would be if WSDL files can be treated as content
or if they're code. A search of this list's archives for "WSDL" only
returns the message I'm replying to. I haven't yet been able to find
external precedent.

-- 
Ben Cotton
He / Him / His
Senior Program Manager, Fedora & CentOS Stream
Red Hat
TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis
_______________________________________________
legal mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]

Reply via email to