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

[Mamoru Tasaka]

Tom "spot" Callaway wrote, at 06/04/2010 04:02 AM +9:00:
> 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
>

Okay, thank you.

Mamoru