Dave Plater <davejplater@gmail.com> wrote:
http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Accepted_licences
jdd
That's what opensource and collaboration is all about, when it's patched don't forget to submit the patch upstream to fedora. I've found the fedora packaging site very useful.
Please think of removing the original BSD license from the list of good licenses. 1) is it as "compatible" to the GPL as the new and simplified BSD licenses are 2) but the original BSD license is not an OSS license as it contains contradicting claims that cannot be followed at the same time while the OSS definition is still valid: a) All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software must display the following acknowledgement: ... b) Neither the name of the University nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission. This means that you need to mention the original author in all advertizing material but you cannot without first asking for a permission to do so. This seems to be in conflict with section 1, 3, 5, 6, 7 of the OSS definition. Fortunately, all code originated from UCB may be relicensed under the new BSD license by permission of the Director of the Office of Technology Licensing of the University of California on July 22nd, 1999. Jörg -- EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) joerg.schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org