Is a disjunctive license that includes CC0-1.0 as one of the options acceptable for Fedora? I'm intending to submit perl-Crypt-Argon2 for Fedora review and the C source code files [2] say:
"You may use this work under the terms of a Creative Commons CC0 1.0 License/Waiver or the Apache Public License 2.0, at your option." But some of the files only mention CC0-1.0. In the github [2] only dist.ini mentions CC0-1.0 without Apache-2.0, but on CPAN [1] this is expanded to README, LICENSE, lib/Crypt/Argon2.pm and script/argon2-calibrate. I'd like to ask upstream to add a dual-license with Apache-2.0 everywhere CC0-1.0 is mentioned, but only if that would be an acceptable result. dist.ini: name = Crypt-Argon2 author = Leon Timmermans <[email protected]> license = CC0_1_0 copyright_holder = Daniel Dinu, Dmitry Khovratovich, Jean-Philippe Aumasson, Samuel Neves, Thomas Pornin and Leon Timmermans copyright_year = 2013 LICENSE: "Daniel Dinu, Dmitry Khovratovich, Jean-Philippe Aumasson, Samuel Neves, Thomas Pornin and Leon Timmermans has dedicated the work to the Commons by waiving all of his or her rights to the work worldwide under copyright law and all related or neighboring legal rights he or she had in the work, to the extent allowable by law. Works under CC0 do not require attribution. When citing the work, you should not imply endorsement by the author. Creative Commons Legal Code CC0 1.0 Universal [...trimmed full license text...]" [1] https://metacpan.org/dist/Crypt-Argon2 [2] https://github.com/Leont/crypt-argon2 _______________________________________________ legal mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected] Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
