[Fedora-legal-list] About Linux Documentation Project License

[Tom "spot" Callaway]

On 06/03/2010 02:50 PM, Mamoru Tasaka wrote:
> Tom "spot" Callaway wrote, at 06/04/2010 01:41 AM +9:00:
>> On 06/01/2010 02:00 PM, Mamoru Tasaka wrote:
>>> Hello:
>>>
>>> In the review of rubygem-ncursesw (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597709)
>>> I noticed that some example files are licensed under "Linux Documentation Project License":
>>>
>>> http://tldp.org/COPYRIGHT.html
>>>
>>> I would appreciate it if it is investigated if this license is acceptable for Fedora
>>> or not.
>>
>> Yeah. This license is Free (GPL-incompatible, but that doesn't matter
>> much for a documentation license).
>>
>> Use:
>>
>> License: LDPL
> 
> Well, I must have written a bit more clearer. In this review request (rubygem-ncursesw)
> some example ruby codes (i.e. scripts written in ruby), not "documents", are licensed
> under LDPL. How should such case be treated?
> 
> (GPL incompatibility doesn't matter for this review. The sample ruby codes actually
>   uses rubygem-ncursesw but rubygem-ncursesw is under LGPLv2+)

Still okay, just be sure to mark the licenses appropriately.

~spot