legal June 2013

legal@lists.fedoraproject.org

4 participants
5 discussions

Re: [Fedora-legal-list] CAcert.org license
by Tom Callaway 12 Feb '16

12 Feb '16

On Tue, 2008-12-09 at 23:03 +0100, Matthias Saou wrote: > > >>>>> "TC" == Tom \"spot\" Callaway <Tom> writes: > > > > TC> Given that it does not give permission for us to redistribute (the > > TC> cornerstone requirement for Content licenses), this license is not > > TC> acceptable for Fedora. > > > > I guess I'm glad I looked before approving the package, but I have to > > wonder: Do the cacert folks actually want anyone to use their > > certificates? I mean, this prevents basically everyone from using > > them, because they can't come with the OS or the browser. > > Personally, the more I read the document, the more I'm confused. > > "You may NOT distribute certificates or root keys under this > licence"... does this mean we can distribute under a different license? Well, sortof. The wording here is strange because you can get a different license from the CA issuer. We can't just pick a license, but the CA issuer might be willing to give us a different one. > Would it be worth getting in contact with CAcert.org in order to try > and have them allow us to redistribute the root certs under conditions > which are acceptable to the Fedora Project? Probably, yes. :) ~spot

4 6

winetricks
by T.C. Hollingsworth 01 Aug '15

01 Aug '15

winetricks [1] is free software, but I was originally under the impression that it was ineligible for inclusion in Fedora because it is used primarily to download and install non-free software. (That is not it's only function, though--it also does some registry hacks and can manage multiple WINEPREFIXes.) However, some members of the community disagree [2] and say that it might be eligible for Fedora, so we'd like confirmation one way or the other. Thanks! -T.C. [1] http://winetricks.org/ [2] https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1992#c40

5 7

libxzfile: "public domain"
by Richard W.M. Jones 22 Jun '13

22 Jun '13

I know that "public domain" can be a minefield, so I'm asking here. Is the license of libxzfile OK for Fedora? http://git.tukaani.org/?p=libxzfile.git;a=blob;f=COPYING;hb=HEAD If this is OK, I'm assuming the License field should be "Public Domain"? Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Fedora Windows cross-compiler. Compile Windows programs, test, and build Windows installers. Over 100 libraries supported. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MinGW

1 1

request to use the operating system Feroda
by uclides gil 04 Jun '13

04 Jun '13

good day sincerely, who writes Uclides Gil. Research and Development Department of the company Síragon Venezuela. are currently in a project aimed at OS install Fedora 18 on a computer of our brand. We are interested in everything related to the various clauses that may occur in order to achieve this objective. All information that we can provide will be a great support. regards

2 1

Starting a Project
by Benjamin Adams 02 Jun '13

02 Jun '13

Hello Everyone, I'm looking to start a project on my own. I would like to grow it to a stable state and a clear direction. Once it's built I would like to integrate it into Fedora. Question is what License would work best for the project to integrate with Redhat's Open source model? Not sure if this really matters but I know Fedora doesn't include some software because of licensing issues. aka: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Forbidden_items?rd=ForbiddenItems I'm guessing I can pick any of these: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main?rd=Licensing As long as it's FSF = yes Thanks Ben

2 1

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

legal June 2013