| Summary: | License clarification | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Bohuslav "Slavek" Kabrda <bkabrda> |
| Component: | rubygem-hashery | Assignee: | Marek Goldmann <mgoldman> |
| Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | mgoldman |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | rubygem-hashery-2.0.0-1.fc18 | Doc Type: | Bug Fix |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2012-06-26 10:20:30 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
|
Description
Bohuslav "Slavek" Kabrda
2012-02-03 11:25:44 UTC
Bohuslav, Please see this: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=653407#c1 Hi Marek, thanks for the response. I see why the Ruby license is present there now, but here is my problem: Since we are migrating from Ruby 1.8.7 to Ruby 1.9.3, which no longer has Ruby or GPLv2 or Ruby, but BSD or Ruby, we need to query all the upstreams what is their choicem if they state it's the "same as Ruby". Would you be so kind as to clarify the license with the author and then possibly fix it, if he decides to use BSD or Ruby? Thank you. Asked upstream here: https://github.com/rubyworks/hashery/issues/11 Upstream says it'll be "MIT" since version 1.5.1: https://github.com/rubyworks/hashery/issues/11#issuecomment-4660688 Version 2.0.0 uses MIT for everything, I changed the license and pushed an update to Rawhide: rubygem-hashery-2.0.0-1.fc18. |