[Fedora-legal-list] About Linux Documentation Project License
mtasaka at ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp
Thu Jun 3 18:50:24 UTC 2010
Tom "spot" Callaway wrote, at 06/04/2010 01:41 AM +9:00:
> On 06/01/2010 02:00 PM, Mamoru Tasaka wrote:
>> In the review of rubygem-ncursesw (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597709)
>> I noticed that some example files are licensed under "Linux Documentation Project License":
>> I would appreciate it if it is investigated if this license is acceptable for Fedora
>> or not.
> Yeah. This license is Free (GPL-incompatible, but that doesn't matter
> much for a documentation license).
> License: LDPL
Well, I must have written a bit more clearer. In this review request (rubygem-ncursesw)
some example ruby codes (i.e. scripts written in ruby), not "documents", are licensed
under LDPL. How should such case be treated?
(GPL incompatibility doesn't matter for this review. The sample ruby codes actually
uses rubygem-ncursesw but rubygem-ncursesw is under LGPLv2+)
More information about the legal