On Dom, 2016-04-17 at 08:08 -0400, Richard Fontana wrote:
On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 07:56:37PM +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> pngquant was relicense under GPLv3  but after a short time
> added an exception and make pngquant as dual-licensed the latest
> README.md says:
> pngquant is dual-licensed:
> GPL v3 or later, and additional copyright notice must be kept
> for older parts of the code. See COPYRIGHT for details.
> For commercial/closed-source/AppStore distribution please ask k
> ornel(a)pngquant.org for a license.
> This is acceptable for include in Fedora ?
The 'please ask' sentence could be read as implying that the authors
regard commercial and 'AppStore' distribution as not being allowed by
the nominal GPLv3 license. In the past I believe we've treated that
sort of thing as reason enough not to allow inclusion in Fedora. You
could try getting the upstream project to revise the sentence.
The author reply:
"Sure, I can clarify. It wasn't my intention to add exceptions to GPL.
As far as I understand App Store EULA is incompatible with GPL, so I
wanted to highlight that. How about:
For Free/Libre Open Source Software it's available under [GPL v3 or
For use in non-GPL software (e.g. closed-source software or App Store
distribution) please ask for a commercial license. "
Looks good ?
You may write directly to author here:
Sérgio M. B.