On Sat, May 20, 2023 at 12:01 PM Chuck Anderson <cra(a)fea.st> wrote:
Is a disjunctive license that includes CC0-1.0 as one of the options
acceptable for Fedora?
Yes, provided of course that the other disjunct is acceptable for Fedora.
I'm intending to submit perl-Crypt-Argon2 for
Fedora review and the C source code files [2] say:
"You may use this work under the terms of a Creative Commons CC0 1.0
License/Waiver or the Apache Public License 2.0, at your option."
But some of the files only mention CC0-1.0. In the github [2] only
dist.ini mentions CC0-1.0 without Apache-2.0, but on CPAN [1] this is
expanded to README, LICENSE, lib/Crypt/Argon2.pm and
script/argon2-calibrate.
I'd like to ask upstream to add a dual-license with Apache-2.0
everywhere CC0-1.0 is mentioned, but only if that would be an
acceptable result.
I will try to take a look at the github repo and the CPAN package when
I get a moment, but yes, "Apache-2.0 OR CC0-1.0" is acceptable for
Fedora (but would just be represented in the spec file as "Apache-2.0"
as explained in our documentation).
Richard