Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487098
--- Comment #12 from Dave Malcolm <dmalcolm(a)redhat.com> 2009-05-13 17:20:11 EDT
---
Thanks.
I got a response from fedora-legal on the partial license grant on this
question:
---
The project's website does state that the overall code license is MIT
[1], my concern was that only a subset of the files within the tarball
carry an explicit MIT grant in their headers, the others are devoid of
copyright/license text.
Based on that, it sounds like this is OK for inclusion, and that I was
being overly paranoid. Is this correct?
Dave
[1]
http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/wiki/Djblets states "Djblets is
under the MIT license."
---
----
Response at:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-legal-list/2009-May/msg00025.html
Based on that, it sounds like this is OK for inclusion, and that I
was
being overly paranoid. Is this correct?
Yes, although, you should still ask upstream to fix the license
attribution on the files which do not contain it.
----
I think this package is ready to approve, with these caveats:
- Please add a comment above the License tag indicating the upstream license
text, and the link to fedora-legal-list above.
- Please change License to "MIT and (MIT or GPL)", with a further comment
about the bundled version of jquery.
--
Configure bugmail:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.