Re: [Fedora-legal-list] License issue with mpich2
On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 2:00 PM, Paul W. Frields <stickster(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 2008-04-06 at 22:56 -0400, Deji Akingunola wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> I've been trying to get mpich2 into Fedora for quite a long time now
> [1]. At this time all the technical issues blocking its inclusion
> seems to have been solved; however Jason Tibbitts did raise an issue
> with the licensing. mpich2 package doesn't contain any licensing text,
> but it ships with a copyright notice which include a 'GOVERNMENT
> LICENSE' and a 'DISCLAIMER' sections, and also simply stating
> 'Permission is hereby granted to use, reproduce, prepare derivative
> works, and
> to redistribute to others.'
> I've had the review ticket blocking FE-legal, but nothing is happening
> on that front yet. I hope FE-legal can look into this and make a
> decision, the upstream is really interested in having the package
> distributed as part of Fedora.
> Thank you.
Typical IANAL-speak, but the US Government is usually required to have a
license for itself, any other licensing notwithstanding, as a condition
of acceptance of paid work. AFAIK, that license is additive, not
restrictive. The license appears to be MIT-ish to me, but Spot can
probably vet this more easily than I.
Thanks to Paul for his comment, and to Spot for acting on it; this
issue have been resolved in bugzilla
(https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=171993).
Deji
--
Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug