On Tue, 10 Jul 2012, James Antill wrote:
On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 16:05 +0200, Ales Kozumplik wrote:
Hello,
I am facing licensing problems trying to submit DNF (a fork of yum) as a
package to Fedora. The whole situation was brought to light by Terje
Røsten[sic][1] , specifically the problem is that few files are missing
the license preambles at their top (and it is thus not 100% clear what
license they are under). The files are:
As far as I knew the preamble wasn't 100% required, but meh. feel free
to point the reviewer to this ML thread.
yum/misc.py
Lots of stuff gets moved into this from other files in yum ... so it
pretty much has to be the same as the rest of the code.
yum/parser.py
This was initially checked in by Paul Nasrat, while working for RH.
rpmUtils/arch.py
This was initially checked in by Seth, and other files were checked in
with the preamble at the same time ... maybe Seth wants to confirm that
he didn't intent to make it something weird, but I'd assume so (and all
my contributions have been under that assumption).
I talked to Tom Callaway and he suggested contacting the yum devel list.
Could one of the maintainers please confirm that the mentioned files are
licensed the same way as the rest of the project (GPLv2), or otherwise
clarify their licensing conditions?
I don't see how they couldn't be.
Even if they aren't all licensed GPLV2 - what's the issue? Is the GPL not
compatible with the GPLV2? I don't recall that issue.
-sv
_______________________________________________
Yum-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.baseurl.org/mailman/listinfo/yum-devel
