rpms/octave-forge/devel octave-forge.spec, NONE, 1.1 .cvsignore, 1.1, 1.2 sources, 1.1, 1.2

[Quentin Spencer]

Ralf Corsepius wrote:

>On Thu, 2005-04-21 at 12:20 -0400, Quentin Spencer wrote:
>  
>
>>Author: qspencer
>>
>>Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/octave-forge/devel
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>License:        GPL
>>    
>>
>
>??? From:
>
>octave-forge-2004.11.16/nonfree/splines/LICENSE.gcvsplf
>
>  
>
>>MEMO:                     GCVSPL software package
>>
>>(C) COPYRIGHT 1985, 1986: H.J. Woltring
>>                          Philips Medical Systems Division, Eindhoven
>>                          University of Nijmegen (The Netherlands)
>>
>>DATE:                     1986-05-12
>>
>>NB: This software is copyrighted, and may be copied for excercise,
>>study and use without authorization from the copyright owner(s), in
>>compliance with paragraph 16b of the Dutch Copyright Act of 1912
>>("Auteurswet 1912"). Within the constraints of this legislation, all
>>forms of academic and research-oriented excercise, study, and use are
>>allowed, including any necessary modifications. Copying and use as
>>object for commercial exploitation are not allowed without permission
>>of the copyright owners, including those upon whose work the package
>>is based.
>>    
>>
>
>IMO, the last sentence might disqualify this package from inclusion in
>FE and should be something to analyze for RH's legal office.
>
>Ralf
>  
>
Yes, it might. However, these files are not built by default, and are 
therefore not included in the RPM that results. I could make the spec 
file remove the nonfree tree altogether to make sure it doesn't happen, 
but the fact remains that the source code is still there. Is that a problem?

-Quentin