Since the review request was marked a FE-Legal because of a potential
trademark concern, upstream has agreed to rename the package. Can
you please take 5 minutes and have a look at the new name(s) upstream is
thinking of. It would help in keeping the review going.
Quoting upstream's latest comment:
> Some time has passed since the last comment about renaming the project, and I
> settled on a new name. I'd like to get Redhat's legal team approval if possible
> before actually renaming the project.
> The name that I would like to use is "Scout", after the character "Jean Louise
> 'Scout' Finch" in the book "To kill a mockingbird". I have searched for
> trademarks with this word on the uspto.gov site and I didn't find anything that
> seems to be directly using this name.
> Would this name have the approval of the legal team? If so, I'll rename the
> project right away and packaging can then continue without the fear of future
> legal/acceptation problems.
Could you please clarify if the Trusster  Open Source License is an
acceptable Free/Open Source Software License for the Fedora project.
The Teal  project uses this license:
=== BEGIN ===
Trusster Open Source License version 1.0a (TRUST)
copyright (c) 2006 Mike Mintz and Robert Ekendahl. All rights reserved.
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
are permitted provided that the following conditions are met:
* Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice,
this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
* Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice,
this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation
and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
* Redistributions in any form must be accompanied by information on
how to obtain
complete source code for this software and any accompanying
software that uses this software.
The source code must either be included in the distribution or be
available in a timely fashion for no more than
the cost of distribution plus a nominal fee, and must be freely
redistributable under reasonable and no more
restrictive conditions. For an executable file, complete source
code means the source code for all modules it
contains. It does not include source code for modules or files
that typically accompany the major components
of the operating system on which the executable file runs.
THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY MIKE MINTZ AND ROBERT EKENDAHL ``AS IS''
AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES,
INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE,
OR NON-INFRINGEMENT, ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL MIKE MINTZ AND
ROBERT EKENDAHL OR ITS CONTRIBUTORS
BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR
CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING,
BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS
OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS;
OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF
LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY,
OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF
THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE,
EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
=== END ===
 Trustter. http://www.trusster.com
 Teal. A Verification Utility and Connection Library.
What is/should be Fedora's policy when it comes to helping people on IRC
who are from embargoed countries? I'm asking because a situation just
happened in #fedora where someone from Iran asked for help, and someone
from the UK refused to help. Obviously that's their prerogative, but if
I'm going to help them, I want to know that I'm not flouting some Fedora
Jonathan (who's incredibly happy that Lebanon's not on the embargoed
Need clarification on the License to be used for nesC  spec file:
The compiler is provided under GPLv2. But, the Java classes that
provide support for reading nesC's XML output are Copyright (c)
2004-2006 Intel Corporation. These were released under the Intel Open
Source License (now deprecated) . In the latest CVS tree, it has
22 The Java classes that provide support for reading nesC's XML output are
23 Copyright (c) 2004-2006 Intel Corporation
25 These files are provided under a dual BSD/GPLv2 license. When using or
26 redistributing these files, you may do so under either license.
So, should I use "GPLv2 and GPLv2/BSD" in the License section of the .spec file?
Appreciate your inputs,
 nesC. http://nescc.sourceforge.net/
 Bad licenses. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Bad_Licenses