[Fedora-legal-list] EUPL v1.1 ?

2009-05-29 Thread Caolán McNamara
On this list previously the EUPL v1.0 was considered unacceptable for Fedora, (http://www.mail-archive.com/fedora-legal-list@redhat.com/msg00144.html) Since then, there is now a EUPL v1.1, http://ec.europa.eu/idabc/eupl does that fix the problems, or remain unacceptable ? Assuming that the EUPL

Re: [Fedora-legal-list] EUPL v1.1 ?

2009-05-29 Thread Luis Villa
I have not looked at the final draft, but as I understand it the purpose of issuing eupl 1.1 was to make it osi compliant. So it *should* be good now. Luis On May 29, 2009 9:35 AM, Caolán McNamara caol...@redhat.com wrote: On this list previously the EUPL v1.0 was considered unacceptable for

Re: [Fedora-legal-list] EUPL v1.1 ?

2009-05-29 Thread Rahul Sundaram
On 05/29/2009 12:40 PM, Caolán McNamara wrote: Assuming that the EUPL v1.1 remains unacceptable, can someone e.g. dual licence something as EUPL v1.X and say LGPLv2 in order to make it acceptable for us. If a software is dual licensed and if any one of them is acceptable to Fedora, the