[Fwd: License issue with iText and releated packages]

[Paul W. Frields]

On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 00:28 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 06:09:05PM -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 15:40 -0400, seth vidal wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 15:34 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > > > Christopher Aillon (caillon at redhat.com) said: 
> > > > > I have a special license issue with iText and related packages like 
> > > > > pdftk, which I want to discuss.
> > > > > 
> > > > > For further information please look a BZ #236310, BZ #245222, BZ #236309
> > > > > 
> > > > > You should be aware, that the plain iText package offers in Fedora have 
> > > > > the same issue like
> > > > > the packages with bundled iText implementations.
> > > > 
> > > > Nuke them all.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > +1
> > > 
> > > I'm glad it got caught, though.
> > > 
> > > Kudos to Andrew Overholt and Kevin Kofler for finding these.
> > 
> > Given this:
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=236309#c3
> > 
> > ...is there any merit in FPC asking package maintainers to go through
> > their Java-including packages looking for similar issues?  Or even just
> > having FPC issue a statement reiterating the need for maintainers to
> > check the code they're entering into the repos?
> 
> Well, the FPC is supposed to do the clean-room design for guidelines
> and not police the packages, or put in different words, the FPC
> discusses the framework and the day to day packaging issues (enforcing
> guidelines, punishing guideline outlaws, deciding on exceptions to
> guidelines) are still within fesco proper.

Failure on my part to conjure the right group name from my weary evening
brain.  Substitute FESCo for FPC in the suggestion -- comments?

-- 
Paul W. Frields, RHCE                          http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
      Fedora Project:  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PaulWFrields
  irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
-------------- 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/20070621/1ca19305/attachment.bin