Licensing Guidelines for apps we write

[Nigel Jones]

----- "Toshio Kuratomi" <a.badger at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi, I've had a chance to talk to spot and I've drafted the following
> policy about licensing the things that we write in Fedora
> Infrastructure:
> 
>   https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure_Licensing
> 
> Do people like it?  Is a GPL family license pretty much everywhere
> good
> for everyone or are there places that we'd like the general rule to
> be
> "MIT" or something looser instead?
> 
> I want to relicense python-fedora (GPLv2 => LGPLv2+), pkgdb and fas
> (GPLv2 => AGPLv3+) if we approve this.  I'll talk to the contributors
> to
> those projects to make sure they have no objections first, but is
> that
> generally acceptable?  Anyone else want to join in on the
> relicensing?
> Having things under compatible licenses will make code sharing
> possible.
> (GPLv2 only is not compatible with AGPLv3+) which is my incentive for
> migrating apps that I'm contributing to onto a common licensing
> scheme.
> 
> I'm putting this on the meeting agenda for Thursday but discussion in
> the mailing list is also welcome.

I definitely won't be at the meeting tomorrow, but yes, this is something that must be done, +1 from me.

I guess to fit in, we should do the some for the voting app.

- Nigel