[fab] [Fwd: What is the mkisofs license?]

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On Mon, 2006-08-14 at 14:03 -0600, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:

> 
> I would like a FC7 goal of having at least the spec files patched to
> use the same 'terms' in every License: tag. GPL, Gnu Public License
> V2, etc makes a job for someone who has to look at these things for a
> 'site' harder. I would like to have the terms to be standardized a bit
> more to something like:
> 
> License: GPL (see COPYING for complete versions)
> License: Various (see LICENSES for versions and files applied)
> 
> etc. That way a person can go see that the license(s) is there, what
> file(s) are it in etc.
> 
> Having each packager go through that rigamarole might have them think
> : "Hmmm this code turns out to be CDDL/GPL/SCO combined code. Maybe I
> should find something else."

What to do with the License: field in the spec file is on the Packaging
Committee's agenda.  We haven't drafted any proposals yet but discussion
seems to be headed towards "License field is just a hint about what the
actual license is".  Where that leads next is kinda up in the air.

If you'd like to join in, discussion goes on in the fedora-packaging
mailing list and #fedora-packaging on freenode.

-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/attachments/20060814/799f6692/attachment.bin