On 02/27/2018 03:22 PM, Gerald B. Cox wrote:
AA. Fedora is not (at this time) concerned about license compatibility issues arising from the relicensing of CUPS to Apache 2.0, in as much as this applies to linking of components together (our use case).

BB. If you are planning on (or have) copying code from CUPS and including it in a GPLv2 only licensed work, seek legal counsel, that is a more complicated scenario that Fedora does not face right now (as far as I know).


Then I don't quite get A. paragraph, where Tom talks about requirements which need to be done. Tom, would you mind clarify it for me, please?
As I understand the issue - this is only related to a few projects that are GPLv2 and are using CUPS in such a way that causes license issues.  If that is the case they should simply change their license to GPLv2 or later.
That's the issue - change of license needs mutual agreement of project owner and all contributors, whose made significant contribution into project (AFAIK) . And it can be difficult.
  It's that simple.  In other words, the onus to fix the issue lies with the projects that are using GPLv2 - not CUPS.  If they don't want to change their license, going forward they shouldn't be using cups. 

Yes, I can package cups 2.3 for Fedora, but I don't want to create additional work for packagers, whose components depend on CUPS, without clear steps what to do when their package is GPLv2 only - because it is not clearly clarified by upstream yet.

I would like to package new cups when I can clearly say - "Hi, CUPS moved to Apache 2.0 license in 2.3.0 version, which is incompatible with GPLv2 only. Packages which are GPLv2 only needs to be re-licensed, there is only way.".



_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org

-- 
Zdenek Dohnal
Associate Software Engineer
Red Hat Czech - Brno TPB-C