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=635511
--- Comment #8 from Ralf Corsepius <rc040203(a)freenet.de> 2010-10-12 09:49:14 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #7)
It looks like you're referring to all of the model files under
the "test"
directory.
Correct.
I've asked upstream for clarification on the licensing of the
test
models via their SourceForge mailing list. If it turns out they're not under a
free license, would it be feasible to re-bundle the source without the test
directory for the srpm?
I am very opposed to forking source tarballs away from upstreams and would
prefer to avoid doing so if possible.
Also, AFAIS, all of the "tests" are "distributable" (legal to be
re-distributed), with their licensing not affecting the "binary" rpms and many
of them either qualifying as "art work" or as "trivial" (==
non-copyrightable
== non-licensable). That said, I don't see much reason to remove any of them.
All I want is RH-legal to give their "rubber stamp" - i.e. them to formally
approve or disapprove the legal status of the sources.
--
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.