[Bug 634091] Review Request: postgresql-plparrot - A PostgreSQL procedural language for the Parrot virtual machine

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=634091

Tom "spot" Callaway <tcallawa at redhat.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Blocks|182235(FE-Legal)            |
               Flag|needinfo?(tcallawa at redhat.c |
                   |om)                         |

--- Comment #7 from Tom "spot" Callaway <tcallawa at redhat.com> 2010-10-05 22:44:44 EDT ---
I would strongly recommend that the upstream properly indicate the license on
each and every source file, but the inclusion of LICENSE in the tarball (and in
source control) seems to make it clear that it is their intent for this code to
be licensed as Artistic 2.0. Also, I do not see any evidence that implies that
this code has been copied from any other source, or that any other licenses are
in play but undocumented.

Please ask upstream to do the following:

* Indicate the license is Artistic 2.0 in some documentation (README would be
fine)
* Indicate the license in all of the source code files:
(Something like this is sufficient: "This code is available under the terms of
the Artistic 2.0 license. For full license details, see LICENSE.")

However, we'll operate on good faith here and assume Artistic 2.0 is correct.
Lifting FE-Legal.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.