Re: Package Licensing - Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL) License

[Justin Zobel]

Ahh OK. Well, it would make sense to have a combined list. Hopefully,
someone on the Fedora side can give me the all OK to include the package
based on RHEL's inclusion policy.

And I just realised I hit reply instead of reply-all on the email again.

On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 8:55 AM Richard Fontana <rfontana(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:

>  In theory, the Fedora list is the RHEL list, but some time ago Red
> Hat
>  started supplementing it internally with another "list" (or compiled
>  information) resulting from review of results of certain scanning
>  tools on RHEL package source code. That "list" is not currently public
>  information. Our current plan is to essentially merge the two license
>  approval efforts so that there is one single public list of approved
>  and unapproved licenses. But it will take some time to undertake the
>  various steps for getting there.
>
>  Richard
>
>  On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 5:14 PM Justin Zobel <justin.zobel(a)gmail.com&gt;
>  wrote:
>  >
>  > Thank you Richard. Is there an "Accepted Licenses" page for RHEL?
>  >
>  > On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 4:40 AM Richard Fontana <rfontana(a)redhat.com&gt;
>  wrote:
>  >>
>  >> On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 9:52 PM Justin Zobel <justin.zobel(a)gmail.com&gt;
>  wrote:
>  >> >
>  >> > Thank you for these insights. Are you able to provide a link to the
>  RHEL review of ODbL for the Fedora license team to refer to in their review
>  process?
>  >>
>  >> Unfortunately in this case there really isn't anything to link to
>  >> apart from a snarky comment by me about how lengthy the license is :-)
>  >>
>  >> Richard
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >> >
>  >> > On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 11:52 AM Richard Fontana
> <rfontana(a)redhat.com&gt;
>  wrote:
>  >> >>
>  >> >> On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 6:49 PM Justin Zobel
> <justin.zobel(a)gmail.com&gt;
>  wrote:
>  >> >> >
>  >> >> > Hi Team,
>  >> >> >
>  >> >> > I've just begun packaging for Fedora and of course, I happen
> to
>  choose one with a license that needs querying.
>  >> >> >
>  >> >> > The Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL) is for
> database
>  usage in the kpublictransport KDE library. It is used for access to
>  OpenStreetMap via the KTrip application designed to aid users in navigating
>  via public transport.
>  >> >> >
>  >> >> > From the OpenStreetMap Copyright page on their website:
>  >> >> > OpenStreetMap® is open data, licensed under the Open Data Commons
>  Open Database License (ODbL) by the OpenStreetMap Foundation (OSMF).
>  >> >> >
>  >> >> > Open Database License: https://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/
>  >> >> > Open Street Map: https://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright
>  >> >> > KDE Source Repository:
>  https://invent.kde.org/libraries/kpublictransport/
>  >> >> > Fedora Source Repository:
>  https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/kpublictransport/
>  >> >> >
>  >> >> > I would like to know if this license is acceptable to Fedora.
>  >> >>
>  >> >> This is somewhat interesting as it is the first case I can think of
>  >> >> where a license that Red Hat has specifically reviewed internally for
>  >> >> inclusion in Red Hat Enterprise Linux has at a later time come up for
>  >> >> a decision in Fedora.
>  >> >>
>  >> >> We actually approved ODBL for RHEL last year, and I think if we had
>  >> >> our contemplated merging of RHEL license review and Fedora license
>  >> >> review in place, it would just end up on the "good" list, but
> given
>  >> >> that the new process is not yet established it would probably be a
>  >> >> good idea to do another review now that it has come up for Fedora.
>  >> >>
>  >> >> Richard
>  >> >>
>  >>
>
>
>  --
>
>