Linux Archive

Linux Archive (http://www.linux-archive.org/)
-   Fedora Packaging (http://www.linux-archive.org/fedora-packaging/)
-   -   OCaml "LGPLv2 with exceptions" - what should be in the License field? (http://www.linux-archive.org/fedora-packaging/56823-ocaml-lgplv2-exceptions-what-should-license-field.html)

"Tom "spot" Callaway" 02-15-2008 10:12 PM

OCaml "LGPLv2 with exceptions" - what should be in the License field?
 
On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 08:59 -0600, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > Jason Tibbitts who has been kindly reviewing many of my packages raises
> > a question about the License field for a common license for OCaml.
> >
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=432482
> >
> > The license starts with this preamble, and then continues with the
> > ordinary LGPLv2. Note that this license is more permissive than the
> > standard LGPL, so this is not a question about whether this is free
> > software or not.
>
> Imo,
> License: LPGLv2 with exceptions
> is perfectly descriptive and valid. Folks will have to look at the
> license file for details anyway. For example, see also qt4 packaging
> that uses something similar.

This specific exception is something which is OK for Fedora, please use
"LGPLv2 with exceptions" as the license.

~spot

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


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:04 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.