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 <[email protected]> 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. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
