Hello Fedora Legal,
Would software under the following license be okay for inclusion in Fedora? Should I pursue the author to relicence?
> DO WHATEVER PUBLIC LICENSE*
> TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR COPYING, DISTRIBUTION AND MODIFICATION
>
> 0. You can do whatever you want to with the work.
> 1. You cannot stop anybody from doing whatever they want to with the work.
> 2. You cannot revoke anybody elses DO WHATEVER PUBLIC LICENSE in the work.
>
> This program is free software. It comes without any warranty, to
> the extent permitted by applicable law. You can redistribute it
> and/or modify it under the terms of the DO WHATEVER PUBLIC LICENSE
>
> Software originally created by Justin Lloyd @ http://otakunozoku.com/
Source: https://github.com/rednex/rgbds/blob/master/LICENSE
Thank you
Sanqui
Hello all,
I know that it's been discussed from time to time about using SPDX
identifiers for our license tags[1][2]. In the Rust SIG, we're
beginning the work to figure out the packaging of Rust things. Cargo,
the Rust equivalent of Python's pip, enforces the usage of SPDX
identifiers for license tags in the Cargo.toml (the file indicating
the metadata of a "crate").
If we're considering using SPDX identifiers for license tags (as it
appeared to be the case in Tom's FOSDEM talk[3]), would it be possible
to grant us the ability to just use that data instead of having to
attempt to maintain a mapping of SPDX to Fedora short tags? Since our
ecosystem in Fedora is basically zero right now, we could avoid the
ugliness right from the get-go.
Thanks and best regards,
Neal
[1]: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/legal@lists.fedoraproject.org…
[2]: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/legal@lists.fedoraproject.org…
[3]: https://fosdem.org/2017/schedule/event/fedoras_legal_state/
--
真実はいつも一つ!/ Always, there's only one truth!