Packaging PyCifRW for Fedora

[Takanori MATSUURA]

I'm now packaging PyCifRW
http://pycifrw.berlios.de/

And the package have a license which is not listed in
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing

You can see the license statement at
http://hg.berlios.de/repos/pycifrw/file/tip/pycifrw/LICENSE

So I'd like to ask whether the license is acceptable for Fedora before
submitting review request.

PyCifRW is required by CBFlib which is under review.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523877


Regards,
Takanori

[Mamoru Tasaka]

Takanori MATSUURA wrote, at 01/08/2011 06:16 PM +9:00:
>  I'm now packaging PyCifRW
>  http://pycifrw.berlios.de/
>
>  And the package have a license which is not listed in
>  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing
>
>  You can see the license statement at
>  http://hg.berlios.de/repos/pycifrw/file/tip/pycifrw/LICENSE
>
>  So I'd like to ask whether the license is acceptable for Fedora before
>  submitting review request.
>
>  PyCifRW is required by CBFlib which is under review.
>  https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523877
>
>
>  Regards,
>  Takanori 
 From my viewpoint the terms 3 and 6 make this software non-free
and not acceptable for Fedora.

Regards,
Mamoru

[Jochen Schmitt]

Am 08.01.11 12:35, schrieb Mamoru Tasaka:
>  Takanori MATSUURA wrote, at 01/08/2011 06:16 PM +9:00:
>     From my viewpoint the terms 3 and 6 make this software non-free
>  and not acceptable for Fedora. 
I agree with this statement. Term 3 and 6 limitated
the usage of
the package: No selling and no usage on medical applications.

Of course the author can wrote, that the software is not designed
for use on medical applications. But writting 'not licensed for use' ist
a bad idea. We have a simular discussion on the iText distribution
bundle with pdftex, where we have found the statement 'Not
licensed for use on nuclear facilities' in a license text.

Best Regards:

Jochen Schmitt

[Takanori MATSUURA]

Dear Jochen and Mamoru,

Thank you for your judgement.
I'll try to rpmfusion.


Thanks,
Takanori


2011/1/8 Jochen Schmitt:
>  Am 08.01.11 12:35, schrieb Mamoru Tasaka:
> > Takanori MATSUURA wrote, at 01/08/2011 06:16 PM +9:00:
> >    From my viewpoint the terms 3 and 6 make this software non-free
> > and not acceptable for Fedora.
>  I agree with this statement. Term 3 and 6 limitated the usage of
>  the package: No selling and no usage on medical applications.
>
>  Of course the author can wrote, that the software is not designed
>  for use on medical applications. But writting 'not licensed for use' ist
>  a bad idea. We have a simular discussion on the iText distribution
>  bundle with pdftex, where we have found the statement 'Not
>  licensed for use on nuclear facilities' in a license text.
>
>  Best Regards:
>
>  Jochen Schmitt

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Monday, 10 January 2011 at 13:47, Takanori MATSUURA wrote:
>  Dear Jochen and Mamoru,
>  
>  Thank you for your judgement.
>  I'll try to rpmfusion. 
Please try asking the author(s) to change the licence first.

Regards,
Dominik

-- 
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org | MPlayer http://mplayerhq.hu
"Faith manages."
        -- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"