Re: GPL and LGPL not acceptable for Fedora!

[Hans de Goede <j.w.r.degoede@xxxxxx>]

seth vidal wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 23:01 -0400, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> > Got your attention? Good.
> >
> > GPL and LGPL are NOT acceptable License tags for Fedora. You cannot
> > simply use "GPL" or "LGPL" as a license tag anymore.
> >
> > You have to use one of the following tags:
> >
> > GPL+, GPLv2, GPLv2+, GPLv3, GPLv3+, LGPLv2, LGPLv2+, LGPLv3, LGPLv3+
>
> seahorse contains both GPLv2+ and LGPLv2+ components
>
> should I have it labeled as both?

That depends, do any of the build binaries contain only LGPLv2+ parts? If not, 
then the GPL trumps the LGPL and the license tag should be just:
License: GPLv2+

If there are binaries which are build from LGPL code only, and these are in the 
same rpm, then it would be:
License: GPLv2+ and LGPLv2+

However, assuming that the LGPL licensed stuff is a lib, which not only gets 
used during building, but also installed under /usr/lib[64], then please 
concider doing a -libs subpackage and use "License: GPL+" for the main package 
and "License: LGPLv2+" for the -libss and -devel sub-packages. The idea behind 
this tags is that interpackage licensing issues can be checked by a script, using:
License: GPLv2+ and LGPLv2+
Is not going to help this script, resulting in people still needing to check 
things manually.

Regards,

Hans (Who has 2 packages of his 150 left todo and then the License tagging 
operation is completed for me).

--
Fedora-maintainers mailing list
Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers

--
Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list
Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly