Follow-up Comment #4, task #16351 (project administration): Thank you for the follow-up.
> Savannah hosting requirements say that the documentation should be released under FDL-compatible terms. The GPL isn't compatible with the FDL. But is CC-BY incompatible with FDL? If it is, I can change the license for the documentation. As far as I know, it should be compatible with FDL as well. I wouldn't choose a documentation license to be intentionally incompatible with FDL, and CC-BY seemed permissive enough that shouldn't cause any troubles. > I'm sorry. Your submission suggested that you didn't really care of the licensing terms of your dependencies (e.g. OpenSSL is licensed under anything but "BSD", whatever it could mean), I'm sorry. I used the ArchLinux package database to check the license for some of the dependencies. For OpenSSL 1.1 (which is the version I use), they list it as "BSD": https://archlinux.org/packages/core/x86_64/openssl-1.1/ I'm sorry for the trouble. > and of our requirements generally ("runs on FreeBSD, Linux, or other systems"). Linux is my main system, so it is were things get tested. The code is portable and should run on other systems as well (which I test from time to time, but breaks once I develop new features and stay that way until I test and fix incompatibilities again). _______________________________________________________ Reply to this item at: <https://savannah.nongnu.org/task/?16351> _______________________________________________ Message sent via Savannah https://savannah.nongnu.org/
